# UK Shadow Home Secretary forces By-Election on principle **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 12, 2008, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677 "2008-06-12T12:54:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/21 "2008-06-13T13:30:30Z")
[QUOTE=Charley] I’m still shaking my head in wonder at the idea that I’m supporting a Tory over something like this. [/QUOTE] Why? “Tory” does not necessarily equal “authoritarian”. It just shows that the one-dimensional right wing vs. left wing spectrum is inadequate. This supposedly centre-left government has persistently been criticised for its illiberal tendencies. ---
**Author:** ![shefDave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/77aa72/32.png) [@shefDave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shefDave)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/22 "2008-06-13T13:39:18Z")
[QUOTE=garius] My gut is that you’ll hear Labour branding it a stunt and saying that they won’t “dignify it by standing,” and the moment Kelvin and the Sun get involved it’ll turn into exactly that. Meaning Brown will even get an “I told you so!” moment out of it at the end. Oh, and the only new debate it’ll provoke is whether we should (in the eyes of the Sun) extend 42 days to cover anyone suspected of being an immigrant or a Germany supporter. [/QUOTE] Indeed. I would love, _love_ for there to be an honest and open debate about terror laws in this country and how much of our freedom and liberty we can and should reasonably expect to give up. And whether draconian laws actually serve to help terrorism rather than hinder it. I would love that. But it hasn’t happened yet. In the whole 42-day ‘debate’ (which was really just a re-hash of the 90-day debate from a couple of years ago) the sole argument from the government was (paraphrased) ‘The police tell us they need it’. Well, of course they do. They’re the police. If you ask a child if they want ten bags of sweets, of course they’re going to say ‘yes’ - it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to let them have them. The majority of the police in the UK would like to see [PACE](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_and_Criminal_Evidence_Act_1984) repealed - it doesn’t mean that’s a good idea either. So, that’s the best our elected government can come up with. Now, Kelvin Mackenzie wants to get involved as well and debate this 42-day business with Davis. What sort of nuanced debate can we expect? > [@Kelvin Mackenzie](#): > > “It’s rubbish [to say that] we are living in a controlled state.” > > “Personally I’m very grateful that there is CCTV around everywhere and I’d like more of it.” > > “Most of us are not bad guys, we have nothing to fear.” > > “The Sun is very, very hostile to David Davis because of his 28 day stance and The Sun has always been very up for 42 days and perhaps even 420 days.” So this is going to be some high quality stuff as well. What a waste of time and money. We have a government that buys itself a vote on an incredibly serious issue, solely so it can score cheap points by claiming it’s ‘tough on terrorism’ - a government whose ministers also leave secret Al-Qaeda intelligence files [on the train](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7449255.stm). This would surely be an awesome time for the Tories and Lib Dems to deliver a series of knock out blows to the Labour. But now Davis has gone and knocked a lot of this off the front pages by making it all about him - and the only person who can be bothered to show up for the by-election is some right wing nut who believes locking people up for 420 days without charge is fine. It’s pathetic. On preview: As **Wallenstein** points out - Davis’ liberalism and libertarianism only goes so far. After all, he’s spoken out strongly against the Human Rights Act - which, if this 42 days stuff becomes law, will be the only legal route for challenging it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/23 "2008-06-13T13:55:30Z")
I can tell you, no American Congresscritter would ever **think** of resigning to force a special election to draw public attention to a particular issue. I’ve never heard of that happening in the UK before either. Is this unprecedented? Of course, I suppose running for election or re-election does not cost nearly so much money there as here. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/24 "2008-06-13T14:06:34Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I can tell you, no American Congresscritter would ever **think** of resigning to force a special election to draw public attention to a particular issue. I’ve never heard of that happening in the UK before either. Is this unprecedented? Of course, I suppose running for election or re-election does not cost nearly so much money there as here. [/QUOTE] I can’t remember the last time it happened. And responding to a previous poster - no Minister left the dossier on a train. It was some senior civil servant. ---
**Author:** ![garius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e19b73/32.png) [@garius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garius)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/25 "2008-06-13T14:19:07Z")
> [@](#): > > I can’t remember the last time it happened. And responding to a previous poster - no Minister left the dossier on a train. It was some senior civil servant. Aye - and to clarify i always feel that holding the _elected_ government (of whatever creed) responsible for mistakes in the civil service that aren’t directly related to ministerial rules/orders/incompetence is a bit harsh. Not that the press/opposition make the distinction though (hence why this Davis bollocks is handy for Labour). > [@](#): > > Of course, I suppose running for election or re-election does not cost nearly so much money there as here. Davis is independently wealthy i believe, so money isn’t really an issue for him (don’t mean that as a criticism of him, just an FYI). > [@](#): > > I can’t remember the last time it happened. [George Lansbury springs to mind](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lansbury) I think a Bunch of Norn Irish MPs resigned over an Ireland Act as well back in the 1980s, but i was busy watching Transformers and suchlike back then so no idea whether it was a pure protest or to force a “single issue” by-election. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/26 "2008-06-13T14:51:34Z")
[QUOTE=garius] Davis is independently wealthy i believe, so money isn’t really an issue for him (don’t mean that as a criticism of him, just an FYI). [/QUOTE] And he’s a self-made man, rather than using inherited wealth. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/27 "2008-06-13T16:17:13Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] I can tell you, no American Congresscritter would ever **think** of resigning to force a special election to draw public attention to a particular issue. I’ve never heard of that happening in the UK before either. Is this unprecedented? Of course, I suppose running for election or re-election does not cost nearly so much money there as here. [/QUOTE] Special elections in our system don’t have the same significance in our system as a bye-election does in a parliamentary system. For one thing, we don’t call elections on a few weeks’ notice. By the time the special election has come around, half or more of your two-year elective term is gone and you have to start campaigning again. ---
**Author:** ![Charley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/97f17d/32.png) [@Charley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charley)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/28 "2008-06-13T17:15:05Z")
I’m surprised to be supporting a Tory over this… [QUOTE=Usram] Why? “Tory” does not necessarily equal “authoritarian”. It just shows that the one-dimensional right wing vs. left wing spectrum is inadequate. This supposedly centre-left government has persistently been criticised for its illiberal tendencies. [/QUOTE] Actually, I think that’s it. I’ve self identified as (a) left wing and (b) a Labour voter for more than 20 years now. Although it’s been a long time since the two were close definitions it’s saddening and surprising how far ‘my’ government has gone and that I would find myself cheering for the opposition as it were. :: shrugs :: ETA to make it clearer I wasn’t trying to edit Usram’s words, but to include context ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/29 "2008-06-13T17:28:51Z")
[QUOTE=tagos] I can’t remember the last time it happened. [/QUOTE] According to the Guardian: > **[David Davis: Other MPs who resigned to fight byelections](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jun/12/byelections.daviddavis?gusrc=rss&feed=politics)** > > David Davis's decision to resign as an MP and fight again for his own seat in a byelection is unusual, but not unprecedented In summary: 1912-Landsbury, over the suffrigette issue 1929-Jowett, Liberal MP, offered post of Attprmey General by Labour 1938-The Duchess of Atholl, over appeasement 1955-Ackland, over nukes 1973-Taverne, over Europe 1982-Douglas-Mann, Labour MP, defected to SDP 1986 15 Ulster Unionists, over the Anglo-Irish agreement. ---
**Author:** ![garius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e19b73/32.png) [@garius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garius)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/30 "2008-06-13T17:39:55Z")
Random fact - George Lansbury was Angela Lansbury’s Grandad 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2008, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677/31 "2008-06-15T07:16:22Z")
This has made me very leery of Cameron as PM: once presented with the fait accompli, he should have come out in full support of Davis. Instead, we’ve seen him dither and mess. This bodes ill should he become PM. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-shadow-home-secretary-forces-by-election-on-principle/452677.md?page=1)