Bright's Blog

15 comments from readers

Schniffles
12 June 2008 at 14:52

It might, in part, be based on conviction but there's far more ego involved. If it were merely about conviction, then why not merely resign as a frontbencher? Because it would involve one day's worth of headlines and politics would then move on. By doing this, he has guaranteed himself acres of news print and the prolonged media exposure he craves.

Why do you think that it is not a safe seat when the Lib Dems won't be running and Labour are unpopular?

It's a shame you support the likes of Davis but not a genuine conviction politician like Livingstone. It's easy to resign when you're in opposition and nothing is at stake - it is far more difficult to face down numerous interest groups, a right-wing media and Whitehall in the way that Livingstone did with congestion charging.

Jonny Mac
12 June 2008 at 16:20

"It's a shame you support the likes of Davis but not a genuine conviction politician like Livingstone." Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!

Martin Bright
12 June 2008 at 16:21

Oh dear. There are a hundred issues on which I disagree with David Davis. But on this one he is right. Of course his ego plays a role. But what's wrong with that? I only wish a the Labour lobby fodder had been a little more egotistical.

Sorry, but I long ago became very sceptical about Livingstone's convictions.

Schniffles
12 June 2008 at 23:34

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/art...

Nothing is at stake here - it's not as if 42 days is law and it's not as if we're at the stage where the Parliament Act might be invoked. The point about the Davis ego is that it is playing the dominant role, as the comment section in The Times makes clear. It doesn't matter whether you think he's right on the issue - what I'm saying is he could have done far more to attack the 42 days proposal if he had stayed in his position. That's what makes all of this stupid and self-serving rather than brave.

Livingstone showed more guts on the congestion charge than anyone else in power has shown during the Blair/Brown years. He was consistent in his environmental and transport policies and delivered on them. He might have been widely disliked by those who knew him (the same could be said for Davis) but the difference with someone like Davis is that Livingstone achieved something. This stunt will achieve nothing. I hope that either no one stands or The Monster Raving Loony Party puts someone up who admits that it will be difficult to distinguish themselves from Davis. Better yet, have someone who knows what it's like to have a loved one murdered by terrorists. At least then it would inject a bit of seriousness into this whole self-serving circus.

taghioff.info
13 June 2008 at 03:45

Hold on a second, I disagree with Martin about Livingstone, but this is about David Davis 42 day and civil liberties.

I don't usually agree with politicians, especially not Tories, but civil liberties are very important, and Marting is right, where have all the principled people gone in the labor party?

You can only run an effective state with good checks and balances. Erode those and you erode the case for active government, and thus the whole basis for [left-wing] [responsible] politics.

That is why 42 days is a disaster, political suicide by Brown.

knave
13 June 2008 at 06:47

I am sorry Martin but this gesture politics. His seat is very safe in the present political climate and I will bet my mortgage that he increases his vote. Rotherham north is safe in this climate. I do agree with you about Cameron retaining the 42 day limit and Davis will still be part of that party that retains this "silly but dangerous" law. Great post tag and spot on.

knave
13 June 2008 at 06:50

Also martin just for my interest

"What do you disagree with Davis on ?"

BarBar of Oz
13 June 2008 at 08:29

Isn't this situation tailor made for an independent Tory candidate supporting the 42 day law to stand against Mr Davis and truly test the feeling in his electorate? If the Brownites have any political acumen at all - however doubtful that proposition given their record - then this is the obvious course of action?

It is truly astonishing that a seasoned politican like Davis has played into the government's hands on this issue at this point in time when the Govt is on the ropes? I suspect Martin Bright, a Labour supporter, is being conveniently disingenuous in encouraging Mr Davis' narcisssim. But I'd do the same.

For Gordon, it's a gift: "Tories fit to govern? Sadly, it seems not. "

Serosch
13 June 2008 at 08:53

BarBar of Oz - I suspect Martin Bright, a Labour supporter -

Steady on, there is only one group Martin supports, a group whose name we dare not mention, and that group extends across all three polictical parties.

Jenny Webb
13 June 2008 at 09:48

Martin Bright a Labour supporter? Ha, ha, ha. Now that really is a good one.

BarBar of Oz
14 June 2008 at 05:48

My apologies. I was assuming that a political pundit saluting Mr Davis would have to be an agent provocateur at the very least.

steve_hmfc_alba
16 June 2008 at 11:45

I think its slightly wrong to say his seat is not safe when Labour came third in 2005 and the Lib Dems aren't even standing.

Asking people to use thier time to vote(and taxpayers expense to fund the vote) is extremely irresponsible given he has such a comfortable majority.

Labour shouldnt legitimise this publicity stunt by having a candidate, because there is a danger MPs all over the place will start forcing by-elections everytime they disagree with a Govt policy

Mind you, the prospect of having a tool like Kelvin Mackenzie, a man who was Editor of The Scum newspaper when it accused Liverpool fans of raking the pockets of the dead at Hillsborough, and also launched into a derogatory and infactual tirade against Scotland at Question Time last year, is not appealing. It will only further lead to this shift towards Labour being seen as the nasty party pandering to right wing tabloids, contrasted with the Tories(and Lib Dems and Nationalists) standing up for liberties.

brightsider
18 June 2008 at 13:39

Just a minute.

Put yourself into the devious mind of Mr Davis.

A man who fought and lost his party's leadership and is now likely to be no2 for a very long time indeed, especially once his leader becomes PM. Sounds familiar?

He deosn't want to be another Brown. How is he going to grab the seemingly unassailable leadership?

By presenting an image as a poitician with deep convictions - the next Chruchill or Thatcher - or Enoch. This is what the masochistic British love when times get tough - the voice crying in the wilderness - the toght leader who will boss us about.

So bang on about Magna Carta and Britishness and off you go...

Look at his 'convictions' in almost any other area than 42 days, then imagine he might just grab the leadership one day - the thought is frightening.

Siberian T
18 June 2008 at 15:36

Need something between Liberals and Labour to stand to make Davies have to work for the seat.

Are the SDP still around?

http://www.socialdemocraticparty.co.uk/

cosmoos
05 July 2008 at 09:55

Despite David Davies promoting the 'idea' of an openly free,and fair by-election he will not allow David Icke to attend his public meetings. What has he got to fear in an open question and answer session with Icke,I wonder?