if ( is_singular() ) wp_enqueue_script( 'comment-reply' );
Ali Gledhill

Ali Gledhill

Thursday 12 June 2008

Why David Davis is Wrong

David Davis has resigned his position as Shadow Home Secretary and is forcing a by-election in his constituency. A bad idea on so many levels.

I admire Davis in many ways (although I admire his successor more), because of his civil libertarian stand. But acting as Shadow Home Secretary, with a clear promise of holding one of the big three Cabinet posts in 23 months’ time, should give ample room to campaign for civil liberties. It is obvious that Davis is far more libertarian than the rest of the Tory hierarchy - he has spoken at length about the number of CCTV cameras and threatened to resign in a meeting with Cameron on whether to support 42 days or not. But his actions today are shallow and counter-productive.

If Davis wishes to promote civil liberties, what better position to hold than Shadow Home Secretary, on the back of a good performance in a recent party leadership race? He stands to gain high office on a matter of months, and has not been ruled out of any future leadership campaign. He is respected by many in the party, and compares extremely well to Jacqui Smith. If he wishes to promote libertarianism in the Tory party, he has exactly the right job in which to do it. The leadership clearly considered backing the government on 42 days, but Davis put his foot down. He was right to do so - and his role as Shadow Home Secretary was perfect for that.

By resigning, Davis has given up his chance to champion such arguments in the future. Grieve has made it very clear that there will be no change in Home Affairs policy, but it is obvious that he is less of a central figure than Davis was. He has left an imbalance at the top of the party, with Cameron and Osborne more powerful today than they were yesterday.

His resignation has also proven a lack of respect for parliamentary democracy. He disagrees with Parliament’s decision on 42 days: he had the chance to vote against it and did. He lost. It is his responsibility to try to force another vote and campaign for a different outcome; a job much easier to conduct as Shadow Home Secretary than as an independent parliamentary candidate. The whole point of votes in parliament is that you can either win or lose, and you try to meet the demands of those who hold the balance of power. I do not believe Gordon Brown should have bribed the DUP members, and I do not believe they should have accepted the bribe, but it is up to them to decide how to vote. I have a lot of respect for the 37 Labour rebels who stood up for what they believed in - and I also have a lot of respect for Ann Widdecombe who defied the rest of her party for her convictions. She was wrong, but I respect her decision to vote by conscience. Parliamentary votes like this are about exactly that: conscience. It’s about winning the argument. Davis’ resignation rides roughshod over the whole principle of liberal democracy.

Davis appears to be positioning himself as a one-issue candidate, and will likely return to the Commons as a one-issue MP. He needs to understand that rehabilitation into the party will be very difficult if he intends to attempt it; otherwise he will live out the rest of his career as a single-issue campaigner the forum for which is better suited to lobbying than representing constituents.

The fallout could be huge. I do not exaggerate when I suggest that this, if handled correctly, could give Labour the chance to race ahead again. It is of monumental proportions. It is difficult to see how it could help to solidify the Tory lead, but time will tell. If, as is rumoured, Clegg’s LibDems do not contest the seat, we will have a straight fight between the Labour machine and a Tory oddjob; a fight that Davis is likely to win, taking attention away from the Conservative party completely. If one of the party’s big-hitters runs out for a personal glory-hunt, it reflects almost as badly on the party as on the individual. It is as if Gordon Brown were to have forced a by-election because Tony Blair refused to grant him permission to tax everyone at 80%.

This is a disgraceful personal glory-hunting campaign from Davis, and I really hope the Tory party does not support his by-election campaign. Moreover, the LibDems should put up a candidate who fights for the electorate on all issues, not for Davis’ ego on Home Affairs. The LibDems could easily steal votes from those who agree with much of what Davis has done but don’t like his attitude. For the sake of respecting liberal democracy, which David Davis has trampled over today, every party should put forward candidates to campaign hard for representing the electorate in parliament, and should they lose a vote or an argument with their party leader they should try to solve the issue instead of subjecting everyone to this kind of trauma.

I do not know what Davis is thinking, but his judgement is wrong. The LibDems are again failing totally in strategy: Nick Clegg seems to have made another poor call, when he had the most to gain. Labour could still make the most of this; it is a monumental mistake for the Tories to let this happen. Labour have a stark choice: be the only party to oppose Davis and risk losing, or fail to oppose him and expose his cheap trick. Either way, there is much to gain.

More from Ali Gledhill | Printer-friendly version
Posted in: Breaking News, Domestic Politics, Lead Story, Punch and Judy, Tories

4 Responses to “Why David Davis is Wrong”

  1. Ali Gledhill says:

    The Times’ editorial tomorrow is well worth a read. It’s title: “from bruiser to loser”.

  2. BenSix says:

    “I admire Davis in many ways (although I admire his successor more), because of his civil libertarian stand.”

    In opposing the 42 Day Detention legislation, Davis has supported civil liberties, but that does not necessitate his being a libertarian. Indeed, his consistent opposition* to homosexual rights strongly suggests that, in believing citizens to be subordinate to the state, he is authoritarian. It is, of course, far easier to prove yourself to be the latter.

    http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpid=1608&dmp=826

  3. Ali Gledhill says:

    BenSix: I should have added “on this issue”. I am aware of Mr Davis’ record on many issues (gay rights being one example) where he leaves an awful lot to be desired.

  4. Totally agree on Davis being a hypocrite. He was for the war in Iraq, against equalising legislation for LGBT issues, for fox hunting and, crucially, for 28 days. Why is 6 weeks so much worse than 4 weeks that it requires a resignation? Why is he resigning now, on this particular issue?

    There is talk of a grassroots coalition coming together of genuine anti-authoritarian activists to stand against Davis and reclaim the agenda - it would be interesting to see if this could muster a high profile candidate and the resources to avoid a big defeat.

    My take on David Davis here:

    http://aleddilwynfisher.wordpress.com/2008/06/15/will-the-real-civil-libertarians-please-stand-up/

    Great blog by the way - I’m linking to it!

    Aled :)

Post a Comment