David Davis to resign
 

Another by election is on the way as David Davis resigns apparently due to internal differences about the Tory stance on the 42 days issue.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7450627.stm

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Do you mean shadow home secretary David Davis Osem, or the other one.?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

All but one of them voted against though? Were there any didnt vote?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

The Shadow Home Secretary - the other one is David Davies IIRC.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Department of WTF?

Davis has been consistently (and I hate to say it, since I disagree with him on a lot of things) principled on the subject of defending British liberties, so to see him apparently at odds with his partys neocon wing* is highly worrying, particularly if he's losing. I suspect there may be differences over how far a Tory government should go in rolling back the New Labour police state framework.

I actually thought he'd make a much better candidate for London Mayor than Johnson, since he's actually from London and isn't an undisciplined, lazy buffoon. Perhaps there's a job for him there.

* such as Michael Gove and the website Conservative Home, colloquially known as 'Continuity IDS'. It's often underestimated how powerful a figure Ian Duncan Smith is on the hard right of the Conservative Party.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

If this is true Osem you've made my day, because its goodbye to a wolf in sheep's clothing.:)

Re: David Davis to resign
 

The Tory blogger Iain Dale was Davis' chief of staff for his leadership campaign and has posted this:

http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/06...s-resigns.html

---------- Post added at 13:06 ---------- Previous post was at 13:05 ----------

Guardian now reporting he'll stand as an independent. All extremely interesting. He'll be joining the Lib Dems next, the way they're going.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2....conservatives

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Good for him!

He is fighting on the purpose of protecting liberties as a way, I guess, of saying there is a mandate for preventing the commons from pushing forward yet more awful laws.

The Lib Dems may not field a candidate in that election, according to the BBC the Lib Dem leadership is asking the local party not to put someone forward.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I thought you didn't like unpleasant ad hominem attacks.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Lord, I was joking about the Lib Dems...

If you're listening, New Labour, don't bother putting up a candidate. Waste of a deposit.

---------- Post added at 13:23 ---------- Previous post was at 13:22 ----------

I don't like off-topic posts, either, Osem.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

What's the Mayor of London got to do with this thread then?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I dont like off topic arguments, so pack it in both you .. now. :nono:

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Leaving that lying there, unloved and forgotten, will the Tories put up a candidate against Davis? They're apparently not going to support him financially.

Last election:

Tories: 22,792
Lib Dem: 17,676
Labour: 6,104

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/290.stm

In other words, add the Lib Dem and Tory votes together and you'll get a thumping for Labour, which I suspect may be the point. Even if the Tories put up their own candidate I suspect there are enough Lib Dem voters who'd switch and enough Tories who'd vote for the man rather than the party to win comfortably, too.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Cameron's just saying how much he agrees with David Davis which makes it rather hard to understand why we have a resignation. :confused:

Perhaps it's a olive branch.......

Oh dear Cameron's live statement has just been hijacked by a what appears to be a disatisfied customer of the NHS .......

Re: David Davis to resign
 

This has to be a publicity stunt...if he is going to stand for re-election is he going to stand as an independent conservative?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

That suggests there'll be a straight single-issue authority/liberty Labour/Davis fight. He ought to get at least 80% of the vote, which would absolutely shatter Brown's assertion that the country is behind 42 days and probably sink it in the Lords.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I hope the conservatives do not put a candidate up against him, thus ensuring a victory for him. It's not a stunt as he stands a real chance of losing the seat and he seems pretty passionate about this issue and so he should be.

Someone needed to take a stand and he looks like he did

---------- Post added at 14:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------

Looks like the Torys will not field a candidate against him:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2....conservatives

Re: David Davis to resign
 

But his already in the shadow cabinet with every chance of being the next home secretary, surely he stands a better chance of repealing the 42 day motion if he stays where he is. This is what a serving minister does if he feels that strongly, not a member of the opposition, it says to me Davis has had a falling out with Cameron who must have told him that he will not repeal the act if they gain power. If that were the case I would have a lot more respect for him, but apparently Cameron is going to campaign for him!! we certainly are not getting even half the picture here.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I think the whole point of this is to combat this belief the government and some on here have that 42 day detention is supported by the public. Yes if he makes it a single issue matter and gets re-elected with a thumping majority it will make it a lot easier for this to be voted down in the lords and thats what i think this is all about. Rather then there being a split in the tory party i think they are being smart and finding ways to defeat the governent. Maybe labour should have voted for a lazy buffoon for leader couldn't have done any worse then gordon.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I think it could be well a chance to gain some sort of mandate to oppose the 42 days law when the Lords kick it back to the house. Certainly would make it harder for it to be forced though via the parliament act.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Oddly enough, Simon Hughes has said that Davis will be re-standing as a Convervative, not an Independent.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Labour may not stand against him as they are trying to position it as a stunt. Seems like they are cowards to me :dozey:

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Whatever the name is, he'll be standing on his own, as standing on a civil liberties platform is not in the Cameron manual. I really hope this explodes the myth the moving ever more towards authoritarian nanny-state rule makes us safer. Poor and frightened, more like.

Of course, once he's elected (and he's already left the Shadow Cabinet, replaced by Dominic Grieve) he'll be an immensely authoritative figure within the Tory party, and one with interesting links to the Lib Dems, who are moving rightwards anyway. I suspect he at least partly wants to diminish the influence of the Tory hard right, who will now, if they want to keep up, have to resign and stand on a platform of bombing Tehran or never withdrawing troops from Iraq or something.

Comment from someone who's met him, who's delighted:

http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.co...of-honour.html

Re: David Davis to resign
 

You mean this misconception Rizzy,;) like it or not these supposedly tough pieces of legislation always go down well with the general public. I'm not denigrating the British public, far from it, but most people don't follow day to day proceedings in the HOC, most have more important things on their minds, so if someone asks "are you in favour of holding terrorist suspects for 42 days before charge" unsurprisingly most will answer yes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ism.uksecurity

Re: David Davis to resign
 

So we should see an upswing in Labour support soon, then?

I'm not sure they *do* go down well, to be honest. The Conservatives have a hell of a lot more support in the country now than when they helped defeat 90 day detention, after all.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I'm not saying its right BB it all depends how they couched the question, as regards an up-swing in Labour support I doubt even the promise of free money would do that.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I think more and more people are waking up to the scare tactic that labour has been using for a longtime and thats the big problem so now labour don't just have to scare us they have to convince us to be scared. When any government uses national security concerns to start eroding the civil rights of a population it is not good and never leads to positive things and it will be no different with this lot. I am no bleeding heart but i simply cannot support detaining someone for 42 days as this government wants and i will not support it. I will await some breaking news on another foiled terrorist plot as that always seems to happen when it is helpful to the government.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

A stunt? Looks like an act of principle & honour, to me, from a man who is trying to make a stand against New Labour's authoritarianism & disregard for traditional British liberties.

I've never liked the Tories, & never voted for them.

But if I lived in David Davis' constituency, I'd happily put my X against his name in the byelection.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Hmm, does this mean Labour MP Denis MacShane thought Robin Cook's resignation was a "stunt" too then?

With a bit of luck, this bill will show the people how in touch the Lords are, how seriously they take their role, and why it is important not to have an elected upper house which has the potential to be in the pocket of the government. Maybe people will see the real reason NuLabour have been gunning for the Lords.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I've no doubt at all David Davies feels very strongly over this, but he is not in power so why resign? his own front bench supposedly feel the same way he does so if he truly wants to make a difference why not stay in the post of shadow home sec, its almost a foregone conclusion he would've ended up home sec, where he would've had the power to change things.

According to the Beeb's chief political correspondent Nick Robinson, certain members of the Tory front bench are not at all pleased with his action, saying he told Nick Clegg the Lib Dem leader of his plans last night, before he told David Cameron this morning, at present we only have the "tip of an iceberg" with this story.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

To be perfectly honest I don't think the majority of the UK population care about it.
A significant chunk would be quite happy for people suspected of wanting to blow up buses/tubes trains etc. popped into a darkened room for a couple of months as they think, rightly or wrongly, the chances of them or their family being locked up are practically non-existent.

The majority are more worried about prices of fuel, mortages, food, crime to really pay that much attention to a piece of legislation that might be used a couple of times a year at most.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I'm not sure about this. I wonder how many people have been held for 28 days without charge since the law was last changed. I don't think it's very many and if it isn't, surely that's some evidence that the powers aren't being widely abused. That's cold comfort to those who may have been wrongly held however.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

i would rather see a suspected terrorist locked away for 42 days, rather than let them loose to blow up a buss full of kids, its not like its a russian gulag there staying in is it ,the uk needs to be a safe place to live ,and the right to live without violence must imo out way a suspected terrorists right to carry out there mission.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

It's only a very small handful AFAIK.


Which, surely, is more a case of "evidence that going beyond 28 days to 42 is not needed"?

No one has made a convincing case for the 42 day limit. [IMO ;) ]

The Govt only won the vote (narrowly!) due to (alleged ;) ) backroom deals with a certain party, plus the usual "We know you don't like this bit of the Bill, but you have to stomach that & vote for it anyway as loyal Labour MPs, OR ELSE YOU'LL DESTROY GORDON'S GOVERNMENT!!!!! OMG!!!!"





Why isn't 28 days sufficient to stop them blowing up "a bus load of kids"?


As for "the right to live without violence must imo out way a suspected terrorists right to carry out there mission.", erm... that's not the argument.

No one is saying that suspected terrorists have a "right to carry out their mission".

But suspects have the right to not be detained for excessive periods without charge or trial, the right to be promptly informed of the reasons for said arrest & the right to be promptly informed of the charge...


We already had the highest pre-charge detention period in the West with the old 28 day limit (higher than the US, higher than Europe, higher than Turkey even)... why the need for 42?


And as David Davis said in his resignation statement, he said he feared 42 days was just the beginning and next "we'll next see 56 days, 70 days, 90 days"...

Remember, Blair wanted 90 days the last time this came up... 28 days was actually a compromise, after the 90 day provision was defeated in Parliament.


Terrorism Act 2000: 48 hours, could be extended to 7 days with permission from a judge.

Criminal Justice Act 2003: 14 days.

Terrorism Act 2006: 28 days.

Counter-Terrorism Act 2008: 42 days.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

so basicly if the authorities caught osama bin laden in London ,you'd let him go free after 28 days ,just because more time was needed to gather evidence, i cant see a problem with 42 days [you ask for a reason for this ] i can give you 52 reasons ,thats how many people died 7/7/05 in the london bombings, or how about the twin towers in new york ,all of those people had the right to be safe . but not if the bleeding heart liberal do-gooders get there way . the world has changed since 9/11 ,how can one persons liberty be more important than the safety of thousands.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

You think they'd need 28 days to build a case against him?

Would you be happy to be locked up for 42 days?

There is no evidence to support your notion that it would have taken 42 days to build a case against the 9/11 bombers or the 7/7 ones either.
Of those who've been held for nearly 28 days, about half were innocent.

Try to realise we're not talking about terrorists here, we're talking about suspects, which so far half have been held for nearly 28 days after doing absolutely nothing illegal.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

If that's true I tend to agree. Had the 28 days been shown to be totally inadequate, there'd have been a better argument for more time. What's to stop them, under current legislation, from just releasing and immediately rearresting a suspect who's already been held for 28 days if that person is considered a serious threat and they need more time to build a case?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Its actually none. No suspected terrorist has ever been released since the law was changed because the police ran out of time to gather evidence. The closest we have come is that 2 individuals came within 2 days of being released whilst awaiting foreign agencies to procure the required evidence. So the longest anyone has been held without charge is 26 days.

Slow cooperation from foreign entities is (an admittedly) good reason for increasing the detention time limit. However I think a better solution overall would be to improve international ties in respect to suspected criminals and justice, decreasing the wait for evidence rather than keep pushing the detention limit further and further up.

---------- Post added at 09:15 ---------- Previous post was at 09:07 ----------

Apparently Rupert Murdoch has offered to put Kelvin McKenzie up as a candidate against David Davis. Madness, he doesn't stand a chance.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Interesting. I'd still like someone to explain why the 28 days could not just be extended if needs be under current legisaltion either by rearrest or use of what I seem to recall (could be wrong on that) are existing emergency powers.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

who really gives a toss.:erm:

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Probably, since MacShane is from the right-wing/neocon wing of the Labour Party and a strong supporter of invading Iraq. He's politically closer to a lot of Davis' colleagues (people like Michael Gove*) than Davis is, let alone the late Mr. Cook. It's important to realise that this is as much about splits in the Tory Party as it's about 42 days. Obviously the Labour Party is even more split. It's not, fundamentally, a party political issue.

* They're both IIRC signatories of the Henry Jackson Society, which is an organisation with strongly neocon views who'd be well up for 42 days, 90 days or quite possibly 'forever'. Signatories include the hard right of both main parties plus journalists and indeed Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6.

http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/s....asp?pageid=36

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I'm guessing if someone was re-arrested immediately after the 28 day limit was up on the same reason*, then even a barely-competent lawyer should be able to get him released under police harrassment. The only way police could re-arrest suspects is if they can immediately charge a suspect and get him remanded.

There is possibly another work-around tactic which is possibly legal but ethically questionable. If there isn't enough evidence to charge a suspect with terrorism, you might be able to buy time by charging them with a minor related offence with the intent to remand him whilst evidence for the principal charges can be procured. I don't want to see that tactic having to be utilised.


* Although some people say the suspects won't know the charges against them (partly because there are any), the suspects do know why they are arrested as its part of their memoranda rights. "I'm hereby arresting you on suspicion of ............. Plus the questions ask are a bit of a clue too.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Someone please tell me that the Police need to keep going to a Judge thoughout the 28 days to continue getting it extended?

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Yes they do, the application for a further 7 days goes to a senior judge, I found this link which explains it better than I could.:)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...civilliberties

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Looks like Kelvin Mackenzie might stand against him BBC News :Yikes:

Re: David Davis to resign
 

It looks more and more like Davis's little stunt has backfired, the Labour party are not going to stroke his ego by putting up a candidate in this safe Tory seat. As regards Mackenzie standing against him, my god who would you choose between them.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I notice Bown is saying that Davis's move highlights "deep divisions within the Conservative party."

Hmmm....

Conservatives: 1 dissenting voter.
Labour: 36 dissenting voters.

That's excluding the 3 "free votes" because many wouldn't follow the part whip.

I think Brown should be more worried about the divisions within his own party.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I think it is the Sun that is involved in a 'stunts' myself.A great way to sell more newspapers.

However I cannot see MacKenzie as 'The Man in White' myself.:erm:

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Anne Widdecombe voting for the 42 days is considered a split for the Tories???

Re: David Davis to resign
 

That is not what I said, "basically" or otherwise :rolleyes:

Furthermore, as Xaccers has already pointed out, do you really think the authorities would need even 28 days - let alone 42 days - if by some freakish occurrence bin Laden was arrested in the UK.



42 days would not have prevented 7/7.


Oh, & since when have the Tories (including David "Capital Punishment" Davis) been "bleeding heart liberal do-gooders"?


Where is the need for 42 days?

At no point has anyone in the Government actually shown exactly why it is needed.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, has accepted that there has not yet been a single case where the police needed more than 28 days.

Sir Ian Blair, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, has accepted that there has not yet been a single case where the police needed more than 28 days.

The Director of Public Prosecutions has said "42 days" is not necessary, due to the recent implementation of the "threshold test" for charging terror suspects. Instead of requiring enough evidence to stand a "realistic prospect of conviction", terror suspects can now be charged where there is enough evidence to support a "reasonable suspicion that the suspect has committed an offence" and where it is likely that additional evidence will soon be obtained.

(Linky)


Lord Falconer, former Lord Chancellor, has criticised "42 days", has said the Bill was "unacceptable", has said the concessions to add "additional safeguards" do not go far enough, has said 42 days is unnecessary due to the new "threshold test", and has vowed to lead the fight against 42 days in the House of Lords.

Lord Goldsmith, former Attorney General, has criticised "42 days", and has said it would destroy society's "fundamental values".

The House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee has criticised "42 days", and has said that "neither the police nor the Government has made a convincing case that the current limit of 28 days is inadequate at this time".

The Commons/Lords Joint Select Committee on Human Rights has criticised "42 days", and has pointed out that it would be illegal under Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Power already exists to extend the pre-charge detention limit by 30 days, in case of a national emergency, under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. The CCA has stronger safeguards than the Counter-Terrorism Bill.[although... the CCA is now going to be amended by the Counter-Terrorism Bill (assuming it passes) to prevent the CCA from being able to be used to extend pre-charge detention for terror suspects].

Also, why not allow the use of "intercept evidence" in prosecutions? If such evidence were admissible, it could be used to enable earlier charging.



In my opinion, the only reasons Brown has staked so much on "42 days" are, for example, to emphasise his authority (oops), and (of course) to attempt to make the Tories look "soft on terror". Oh, & New Labour's fondness for Authoritarianism & trampling on traditional & fundamental British liberties.


The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 could be used to extend pre-charge detention by 30 days in case of a national emergency [see above].

---------- Post added at 21:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:28 ----------

Back to the specific topic...


I do wonder if Labour will field a candidate.

If they don't, it could be seen as cowardice by some.

And if they do, he/she is likely to get slaughtered at the polls.


And I find the idea of Kelvin MacKenzie standing rather ridiculous. [And would he stand as an Independent, or as a member of the Rupert Murdoch Party?]

Re: David Davis to resign
 

I wonder if Rup has broken a law here, a foreign national trying to influence our democracy in this way must be illegal and if it isn't then it should be, it's bad enough he pollutes our party's and electorate with his rags.

Re: David Davis to resign
 

Murdoch's been influencing our politics for years now, but what I find really sickening is the way both major party leaders suck up to him in an attempt to have the Sun back them.
In the eighties and early nineties the Sun was staunchly Conservative, but once it saw which way the political wind was blowing, and with new Labour sucking up to Murdoch the Sun had what can only be called an epiphany, and began to back Labour.
What a lot of senior Conservatives are worried about is David Davis alienating Murdoch with this stunt, its been said by politicians and journalists that a party can't win without the Sun's backing. What a truly sad state of affairs that this Aussie thug has such sway in our politics.:mad: