Thursday 12 June 2008

David Davis

The Tory Leadership Election is on, I see. One of the morally and socially conservative, Eurosceptical, Unionist remnant, or at least someone as near thereto as could possibly be permitted within the Shadow Cabinet, has finally had enough (at least fifty years late, but never mind), and is quite clearly mounting a challenge.

Almost everything on Davis's entirely correct list of assaults on liberty was pioneered by the Tories' immediate previous Leader when he was Home Secretary, and it is inconceivable that the Cameroons really would repeal any of it.

The Conservative Party's refusal to fund his by-election campaign says it all, as does Cameron's stitch up of no candidates from the Lib Dems (certainly) or Labour (probably, and in that case in breach of its own Constitution) in order to deny Davis his victory. If Labour really won't be putting up, then one of the commentariat supporters of 42 days should do so as an Independent. What are they afraid of?

There is an underlying point here. People go into politics because they believe that the State should do certain things. When the State delivered education and health care, and ran things like railways and mines, then it felt no need to introduce ID cards, or to bang people up for six weeks without even so much as charging them, or to keep vast databases on them, or to watch them all the time. For that matter, no such needs were felt when the Police patrolled the streets on foot.

But now, having arbitrarily decided that they will not do such sensible and necessary things as delivering education and health care, or running railways and mines, or ensuring that the Police patrol the streets on foot, how are the political and administrative classes to occupy their time? Why, by introducing ID cards, and banging people up for six weeks without even so much as charging them, and keeping vast databases on them, and watching them all the time, of course.

That, and waging pointless wars.

16 comments:

  1. As no doubt other people saw last night on This Week, Kelvin MacKenzie is talking of running against Davies. It was a suggestion of Murdoch's who apparently is offering to bankroll him (through legal means obviously as he is not a UK citizen).

    MacKenzie said last night he would be happy with 420 days pre-charge detention.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why don't you stand against Davis in the Haltemprice and Howden byelection? Labour won't put up a candidate, and there will be plenty of disillusioned ex-Labour supporters who won't vote for Davis but have no one else to vote for. It would be an ideal opportunity to bring the BPA to public attention and prove all the nay-sayers wrong.

    Go on.

    I dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We're backing David Davis, and hope that our critics are happy to have found their intellectual and social level as supporters of Kelvin Mackenzie. We are certainly very happy for them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Frit?

    You challenged your enemies to stand in the European elections, and called them frit if they didn't.

    When they replied that they had candidates they supported, and there was no need, you still called them frit.

    So why won't you stand in H+H? Frit?

    ReplyDelete
  5. We have a fully endorsed candidate there this time round. David Davis.

    As, clearly, have you. Kelvin MacKenzie.

    I think that that says all that there is to say about you, and about your whole kind.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ah, so you won't stand. Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. We've always said that we won't be standing in anything before the European Elections.

    It's whether your lot will contest them that is the real question.

    After all, someone really is now contesting an election openly and specifically on your agenda.

    Kelvin MacKenzie.

    You must be very proud.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, but that was when you didn't know about this election. And now you won't stand.

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It was before we knew about ANY election in particular - Crewe & Nantwich, Henley, anything. That is precisely why we said it.

    Now, run along and get campaigning for that great parliamentarian in waiting - nay, even very statesman -, Kelvin MacKenzie. You have found your level.

    ReplyDelete
  10. When the boot was on the other foot, you didn't accept any excuses from your opponents. Either they stood in your defined challenge, or they were frit.

    And now, we turn to you. David Lindsay. Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  11. We have a candidate. David Davis.

    As have you. Kelvin MacKenzie.

    You must be very proud. We certainly are.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Leave them, David. In my words yesterday, which you have picked up on today: "dribbling, inbred, drunken coke-heads, posh schools or no posh schools".

    ReplyDelete
  13. "We" had candidates for the European elections. That is why "we" didn't respond to your ridicolous challenge about Oliver Kamm. But still, "we" were frit.

    And now, you have a candidate for H+H. David Davis. But still, you won't stand.

    I have only one thing to say. (You can guess it can't you?)

    David Lindsay. Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  14. " "We" had candidates for the European elections. That is why "we" didn't respond to your ridicolous challenge about Oliver Kamm."

    Now THAT really is news.

    "And now, you have a candidate for H+H. David Davis. But still, you won't stand."

    Of course not. For the reason given: we are backing the national hero, David Davis, in his fight to preserve and restore the liberties that you would steal or have already stolen.

    Whereas you are backing that titan, Kelvin MacKenzie.

    Anonymous 17:55's point is proved.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well, David, this is quite a surprise. Are we to assume that you would be happy to join the Conservative Party if it had David Davis as its leader?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Not at all. I don't know why he's still in it. Indeed, it is quite clear that he barely is.

    A surprise that I support him against MacKenzie? No it isn't.

    ReplyDelete