David Davis resigns on principle over 42 days detention

I have a friend who works in the Shadow Home Office team so I know that David Davis was passionate about the issue of 42 days detention. I had no idea he was quite this angry about it.

The Labour bloggesphere is tied in knots over this. They are trying to double guess the motives behind it, their speculation shows why they are a spent force in British politics. While they try to find the media spin angle or the hidden leadership bit they miss the blindingly obvious fact that their actions are wrong. Deeply and dangerously wrong.

The full arguments of this issue need to be put into the wider public domain. This by-election will force people to address what is actually at stake here, the subtle but relentless increase in the power of the state and the erosion of the rights of the individual.

There are many historic examples of what happens when the individual freedoms are discarded because of the amplified threat from elsewhere. Stalinist Russia, China under Mao, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, Germany under Hitler, Cuba under Castro.

The enemy was at various times the Jews, the Bolshivics, the Western Imperialists, the Contra-revolutionist etc. The threat was always much less than the regime painted it to be, the suffering under their own government was always far greater.

As the man behind the Devil’s Kitchen blog once said “1984 is a warning, not a f***ing instruction manual.”

totalitarianism

12 responses to “David Davis resigns on principle over 42 days detention

  1. This is excellent news, and thoughts of a fightback from Brown can now be dismissed. Labour cannot afford to shy away from this by-election and the result will help set the agenda for the incoming Conservative administration.Three cheers to DD.

  2. This is excellent news, and thoughts of a fightback from Brown can now be dismissed. Labour cannot afford to shy away from this by-election and the result will help set the agenda for the incoming Conservative administration.Three cheers to DD.

  3. A by-election will not result in a public debate on the issue. Possibly in a single Tory constituency, but not in the wider public or the media. Labour will not win and will not bother to fight, certainly not on the issue of 42 days. A public debate requires two sides, the by-election will be one sided and without any interest to the media or the wider public.The guy has principles, but that doesn’t do any good when the Executive controls the Legislature. This law would never have been passed under PR.

  4. A by-election will not result in a public debate on the issue. Possibly in a single Tory constituency, but not in the wider public or the media. Labour will not win and will not bother to fight, certainly not on the issue of 42 days. A public debate requires two sides, the by-election will be one sided and without any interest to the media or the wider public.The guy has principles, but that doesn’t do any good when the Executive controls the Legislature. This law would never have been passed under PR.

  5. “A by-election will not result in a public debate on the issue. Possibly in a single Tory constituency, but not in the wider public or the media.”I disagree. Crewe and Nantwich became primarily about the 10% tax band. Would Brown & Darling have been forced into their (ultimately pointless) “solution” without it? OK, so the contest was the result of an MP’s death, but it was the defining issue of the campaign, and led to a national debate.Now I don’t think an H&H by-election will lead to a change in the 42 days thing (sadly) but it has a good chance of engendering the debate that DD wants.

  6. “A by-election will not result in a public debate on the issue. Possibly in a single Tory constituency, but not in the wider public or the media.”I disagree. Crewe and Nantwich became primarily about the 10% tax band. Would Brown & Darling have been forced into their (ultimately pointless) “solution” without it? OK, so the contest was the result of an MP’s death, but it was the defining issue of the campaign, and led to a national debate.Now I don’t think an H&H by-election will lead to a change in the 42 days thing (sadly) but it has a good chance of engendering the debate that DD wants.

  7. Crewe and Nantwich was contested by the Labour Party and they would have liked to keep the constituency. Labour know they won’t win in H&H, where they got 13%, so they won’t bother.What will be interesting is the Conservative party verses The Sun if it happens. The media entering politics so directly is a very dangerous development for democracy, but the only loser will be the Conservative party. David Davis has seriously miscalculated, but I think with the best of intentions.

  8. Crewe and Nantwich was contested by the Labour Party and they would have liked to keep the constituency. Labour know they won’t win in H&H, where they got 13%, so they won’t bother.What will be interesting is the Conservative party verses The Sun if it happens. The media entering politics so directly is a very dangerous development for democracy, but the only loser will be the Conservative party. David Davis has seriously miscalculated, but I think with the best of intentions.

  9. The one thing I’m delighted about is that “Westminster Village” really has got this wrong. DD is a man of principle. We Brits will love him for it.

  10. The one thing I’m delighted about is that “Westminster Village” really has got this wrong. DD is a man of principle. We Brits will love him for it.

  11. The Nazi’s first enemies were their immediate political opponents, communists, SPD, trade unionists. Nonetheless they passed the protective custody decree in 1933 and got round to the Jews in November 1938. The only difference between what labour have just done is the length of time. Labour its 42 days and the Nazis indefinite. What will this legislation be used of in 50 years time??

  12. The Nazi’s first enemies were their immediate political opponents, communists, SPD, trade unionists. Nonetheless they passed the protective custody decree in 1933 and got round to the Jews in November 1938. The only difference between what labour have just done is the length of time. Labour its 42 days and the Nazis indefinite. What will this legislation be used of in 50 years time??

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s