David Davis; A Principled Stand

David Davis has made a stand for what he believes in. After all the criticism that politicians have come under for not believing in anything, for being selfish, and self-serving this is a breath of fresh air. His is putting his career in jeopardy, and is playing a very noble, but personally risky game by triggering a by-election.

However, it is not being portrayed this way in the media. Whilst we all know that the BBC institutionally leans towards Labour, I would have expected a different response from The Daily Mail and also The Sun. However, it seems they have once again gone back to the Headline Grabbing articles/titles that do not accurately reflect events and views.

Yes this is an unheard of occurrence, yet so is the abolition, or step towards the abolition of habeas corpus. This country has fought for the freedom of the British people for centuries, and this Labour government has bought the votes to sacrifice this for political measures.

"the most salient example of the insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of fundamental British freedoms."

David Davis on the 42 day detention limit

David's full resignation speech (which he was not allowed to present in the House of Commons) can be seen below.

Guilty before charge; The 42 day detention limit

And so it has been decided. At least for now that is. With a majority of just 9, Gordon Brown has managed to avoid another humiliating defeat. 315 to 306 voted in favour of the plans to raise the detention without charge limit from 28 days to 42 days.

The surprise in this tale is that the DUP voted for the plans. Their nine votes swung vote in Brown's favour, and there is now talk about how Gordon managed to "persuade" them. He of course denies all claims by the opposition (both Lib Dems and Tories) that they were bribed with cash for Northern Ireland.

I haven't yet talked about the bill itself, and what it does to this country. We have always been a very principled country, and I believe very strongly in 'innocent before proven guilty'. What this bill amounts to is 'guilty until we can decide what crime you have committed'. The 28 day limit is, in my opinion too long, but I will concede that terrorists do pose a new, and very different threat than mere 'normal' criminals, and have such a hard-line attitude themselves that it is necessary to take a rougher stance when dealing with them.

However, if you have enough evidence to detain them in the first place, then why not charge them? If you don't have the evidence then they should not be held.

This bill is a step in the wrong direction, and just another Big Brother infringement on our society and a severe breach of our civil liberties.