Shadow Home Secretary David Davis stuns Parliament by resigning to fight by-election over 'strangulation of British freedoms'

In a Mail wet dream he's resigned due to the 42 day terror thing and what he says is too much intrusion into our lives.

I bet the mail are pissed, one of their rent-a-quote's just went.

Is this the same David Davis who regularly turns up in anti-immigration stories providing the ranting quotes the Mail and Express crave so desperately to prop up their pathetic arguments? *That* David Davis is suddenly the champion of the liberal left?

The clue is in the 'state intrusion' bit, I think. There are a million and one totally valid arguments against 42 days but he chooses a slightly weak one which will, nonetheless, please the small-state Tories.

Not quite the brave stance that the Mail and others will make out. He holds a very safe Tory seat so will be re-elected unopposed in order to make his point.

28 days is OK for him but anything 29 and over is state control.

I do not think he ever got over giving a crap speech at the Tory conference and then being surpassed by the snake oil salesman Cameron.

The media are creaming themselves over this, as it was a slow news day.

He called hate crimes "so called" in his speech. That sort of thing rubs me the wrong way.

Not much of a gesture, admittedly. But still something. I'm assuming he was hoping to provoke similar resignations across government, which may have some impact.

But fuck it, after the display of shameless desperation on behalf of the Prime Minister yesterday, I'm willing to hand some credit to Davis for making some kind of a point about it.

Oooh nice little bit of posturing there, 'look at me everyone, i'm making a statement'

Since when did the tories give a crap about liberty? Remember the Prevention of Terrorism Act from tha 1980's that restricted press freedom. The opposition to the new rules is almost as degraded as the case for it, they try to make it seem as if the whole of British democracy rests upon only being able to lock people up for 4 weeks without charge rather than six. It's even more fearmongering than the arguments for 42 days.

Where are these great crusaders for liberty when other freedoms, outside the fashionably objectionable world of anti-terrorism are at stake? When it comes to more insidious attacks on personal and public freedoms – such as thealcohol ban on public transport in London, the planned vetting of 11million adults who work with children and the elderly, the attacks on ‘offensive’ free speech, and so on – many of them are either nowhere to be seen or on the wrong side of the debate entirely. Nor do they seem so keen to campaign on behalf of less fashionable objects of authoritarian law than Islamic terror suspects.

I'm completely confused. He's not making a protest against his party. He claims he's making a stand against the government, but he's in the opposition. And he voted against the government.

Given the fact that he's in a pretty safe Tory seat it's not going to be any kind of "referendum" on the issue, because he'll win. I don't get it at all.

As has been mentioned, davis himself is a cunt of a man, I remember him going on about repealing hate crime laws in the spectator, proper twat.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/politics/20 ... tical.html

I don't know. I still think 42 days is going to get shot down in the Lords anyhow, either way 9 is far too small a majority.

Of course it will, so will the human emybro bill though which is a worry.

Davies supports capital punishment?

It's a great job where you can resign and be back doing the same thing in a few weeks

If he can resign and declare that his re-election is a referendum on a particular policy issue then isn't he completely redefining what Parliamentary, representative democracy is? Isn't that a trifle dangerous for a Conservative?

One day they'll be back in government, and they'll be unpopular. What if a Scottish MP in a safe NAT seat resigns and declares that his by-election will be referendum on independence, for example? What will Davies say then?

This must go down as one of the biggest hissy fits in the history of politics. Davis single-handedly persuaded his mate, "Dave" Cameron to get his party to oppose the 42-day terror limit (something I actually support). In a fit of contrition at failing to get his own way, he has thrown his toys out of the pram, stormed off and whinged to the press about how he will "fight for British values" which presumably include making it harder for counter-terrorism police to do their job.

But, was he pushed? Think about it, he was the one to convince the Tory hierachy that opposition to the measure was the way to go. He then proceeded to lose the vote and lose face for the Conservative Party. I doubt very much Mr Cameron would have tolerated being made to look weak against the Labour Party, especially on an issue (national security) which it likes to think it should take the lead on, much like law and order. It also meant Brown survived any calls for his head, can use the Parliament Act which will again raise criticism of the House of Lords, a great Tory institution and thus give Brown something to cling onto and build on.