A true champion of liberty or a shameless opportunist?

Yesterday, British politics was stunned by the resignation of the Conservative Shadow Foreign Secretary, David Davis....in order to trigger a by-election and fight his own seat! This decision, unparalleled in modern times, comes as the result of the British government winning a very close vote this week, supporting the introduction of a 42 day detention period for terrorist suspects.




I find myself in the invidious position of supporting the stand of a politician whose party I cannot stomach against a Labour government which seems to have lost the plot as far as human rights are concerned, but the decision is an amazing and controversial one for many reasons, regardless of his motives.

First off he could lose if anyone of substance stands against him. The popular feeling in the country is in favour of longer detention for terror suspects, so its not exactly a popular issue on which he has chosen to throw down the gauntlet. It has clearly provided some relief for the Labour Party who have been on the end of some pretty vitriolic abuse from their political opponents and the media alike. Now the focus has to be on Conservative leader David Cameron.




Cameron was starting to make headway in local elections and public support when, suddenly, the rug is pulled from under his feet. What he must be thinking of Davis this morning does not bear public utterance. He must be embarrassed and angry. It looks as if he has little control over his own party when a senior spokesman takes an action like this.

There was clearly no consultation before Davis took this unilateral stance and, weird and ironic that it may be, a Conservative shadow minister who has 'resigned on principle in order to trigger a debate' is the darling of the liberals. This is clearly not a decision designed to endear Davis to his leader and the ultimate scenario seems to lead in one of two directions. When (as seems inevitable) Davis is returned to Parliament, he will either a) be shunned by his leader and shuffle off to the obscurity of the back benches for ever or b) Will be an ever greater thorn in Cameron's side, eventually provoking a new leadership contest.

Why did he REALLY do it? Will we ever find out? On first sight there has to be more to this beneath the surface. It's not as if he was at odds with his party in that they opposed the 42 day detention pretty much en bloc. One would ask why he felt the need to take such an extreme step. Davis did fight Cameron for the leadership of the Conservative Party when Michael Howard resigned, and the two men are hardly bosom pals, but it would be foolhardy to seize on the first opportunity to cause trouble for his leader, especially when the Tories are riding high in the polls. All that would do is paint Davis as a shallow, immature opportunist and a bad loser.

I think he is too bright a politician to be unaware of all these things and so there has to be something else behind it. Maybe what you see IS what you get. Maybe he really is sick of the catalogue of abuses of civil liberties which Labour has perpetrated over the last few months and seen terrorism as an easier medium for his stance than the various new pornography laws for example.

Anyway, whether Labour puts up a candidate is yet to be decided (more Gordon Brown dithering) but it looks as if he might get some kind of a challenge from former Sun editor Kelvin McKenzie. I hope he does. At least if there is a real by election and a candidate who has to explain why he took this extraordinary step to the consternation of his party and its leader, we might get some answers.

In the meantime the Labour Party can bask in a rare week when the guns were not turned on them!