What is the point of a representative democracy if MPs resort to referendum by-proxy every time the majority of their colleagues pass legislation which they oppose? There is a very good reason why the Rousseau model of democracy is unworkable; the electorate elect representatives for a reason and not to then make every decision themselves.
The fact of the matter is that the issue was debated by our elected representatives in Parliament, and a vote was taken. All MPs, elected to represent their constituencies (meant in the broad sense - i.e. both geographically, and ideologically), had a vote, and they were free to use that vote in accordance with their own conscience.
Those who opposed the anti-terror legisation lost. In Parliament. Where legislation is decided.
Moving the debate over this issue to a constituency in Yorkshire is not how legislation in this country should be decided.
Hence I vehemently disagree with the view of former Davis henchman, Iain Dale, on the resignation - that:
"this isn't about one man's vanity. It is about the ability to sacrifice personal and public advantage for a greater cause."
And that:
"If [Labour don't field a candidate], they will be treating the issue (and voters) with contempt. The 42 day issue can now be debated fully during the by election campaign."
Rubbish. It is David Davis who is treating the issue (and voters) with contempt. Firstly, he is ignoring the proper institutions in which these matters should (and have) been decided. Secondly, he is forcing the taxpayer to fund his vanity exercise - money which could be better spent on public service provision, not ego-massaging.
Labour would do better to tell it how it is: David Davis put his arguments to Parliament. And lost. Therefore there is no need to re-engage him on this debate in a by-election.
It is to the Lords that Labour's attention should now focus. The bodies of Parliament - not Haltemprice and Howden - is where this matter should rightly be decided.
One response to “Labour should not indulge David Davis' ego”
I'm going to disagree here.
Freedom can't be based on the license issued to individuals, elected as MPs, on one day in 2005.
Gordon Brown and the Labour spin machine have done everything they can to close down the debate on the 42 day detention without trial issue and other issues concerning our freedom.
The result of this campaign is that Labour lead by Gordon Brown look like manipulative cowards who run from a fight and lack the courage of their convictions. It has also forced the Conservative party to nail its colours to the mast of Freedom and committing to repeal the 42 day suspension of rights guaranteed to every free born Englishman for almost the last 800 years, until New Labour came to power.
The cost of the byelection is a red herring. £70k is nothing in the balance sheet of government waste and spending.(And nothing compared to the £2.7 billion loan Gordon Brown took out to try and win the Crewe and Nantwich byelection in our names ).
Can you remeber the people's juries and other New Lab consultation exercises using government money to fund political campaigning ?
David Davis may not be everyone's cup of tea, though he does inspire strong loyalty in many people who know him. There is no denying that he has changed the course of the national debate in the country.
This can be seen in the traditional smears that New Lab have tried, and now the unplanned speech on civil liberty that Brown made last week, and the news items on local council abuses of anti-terrorism powers combined with the debate on DNA and CCTV ( again New Labour trying to steer the argument their way ).
Post a Comment