Comments on: David Davis

By: Darrell G

Darrell G — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:46:00 +0000

This is not David Davis standing on a single issue; this is not David Davis the 'against 42 days party candidate'; this is nothing like instances in the past where platforms have been put forward that are genuinely single issue...

All his vocal cheerleading is coming from the sections of the party that hate Cameron...conincidence? I think not....not standing is politically naive and damaging to the party in the extreme. Who will want to talk to a Party that isnt even fielding a candidate....

By: Terry

Terry — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:02:00 +0000

He is right because his actions have highlighted the problems ie Will the world be a safer place. However, the issue of evidence (nay, proof) is even more paramount and the public needs the information placed before it so that justice is seen to be done.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:00:00 +0000

Dear Lynne,

It is good to be able to agree with you about something! We would (quite seriously) welcome you and other Lib Dems on the campaign trail in support of DD - and so long as he campaigns ONLY on 42 days, I don't see what that would be inappropriate. But I don't suppose your whips will let you?

Toby Boutle.

By: Jabez Bunting

Jabez Bunting — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:14:00 +0000

Am I the only one who cannot fathom David Davis' decision regardless of whether I agree with him on the issue of 42 days or not?

Surely he's be better off fighting the civil liberties issues from his position in the official opposition?

Most importantly, doesn't his decision trigger an otherwise needless by-election? On this basis, I cannot see why public funds should be used to administer the election; nor can I see how anyone can justify the disruption to the educational and community life of East Yorkshire as schools, village and church halls are paid for, hired and used as polling stations.

Perhaps the real issue in this by-election is should Council Tax payers' money (no doubt from "hard working families") to fund a personal political stunt?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 06:16:00 +0000

I'm glad he has resigned. It's M.P.'s like him that give prisoners duvets,and t.v.'s in their rooms; lol (shouldn't that be cells). Oh sorry, i forgot they are there for a holiday. That's why there are more foreign nationals than English in there. Once again i had forgotten they come over here to work; or do they. No they don't, they come for an easy life, something we never had; but they take for granted.
Lets have a referendum; and make prisons just that.Not bloody holiday camps. Or better still Deport them; but oh i forgot again; they would rather spend thousand of pounds keeping them in prison; than deport them, and stop them coming back again.Britain doesn't belong to the British anymore.

By: Neil

Neil — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:10:00 +0000

Surely stepping gives the impression that if you want to oust the Labour Party then vote Conservatives. I believe this decision may well harm the party.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:41:00 +0000

I don't understand how he can do this.

You are not allowed to resign as an MP. If you want then to you have to apply for one of two fictuitious paid offices of the Crown (The Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds or the Baron of Northstead). This invalidates your membership of the House of Commons and causes the by election. I assume this is what David Davies will do next.

But then what? Surely as the Steward of Baron wactchamathingy he will be ineligible to stand for Parliament (that's the whole point) and so won't be able to stand as a candidate in the by election he causes?