Posts Tagged ‘David Davis’
Two key issues
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 13th, 2008
After a relatively long period where the only issue was how much Labour were going to lose by, we now have two major issues running alongside each other.
Whatever you think of David Davis’ decision to resign he has definitely kept the issue alive. The question “Is it okay to imprison innocent civilians?” would have become just another abuse of freedom had Davis not made his unusual decision.
And he’s highlighted another problem — the BBC and ITV who are supposed to be completely unbiased have continually described the situation as ‘bizarre’. As part of BBC dumbing down they have long sought to explain the implications of situations in news articles rather than just presenting the facts. But on this issue it is quite clear that they are going beyond simple explanation and clarification. If the situation is unusual (and it is) then that is fine, but to say that Davis may have “committed political suicide” or that “David Cameron… is furious” is to make leaps beyond the facts.
Let us be clear too: This is about locking away innocent people. There will be no trial, no evidence will be presented to the victim (of the state) and no news will be delivered to him. This man is losing all rights without being able to help show why he is innocent; and he shouldn’t need to do that.
European Constitution
The other key issue is the European Constitution aka the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish Prime Minister said the other day that the Lisbon Treaty is 95% the same as the Constitution. And the public in Ireland look like they have done for us what we were denied by our liar Prime Minister. Thank God.
Shami on Davis
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 12th, 2008
David Davis has resigned his constituency seat expecting, one must assume, overwhelming support for the position rational politicians have taken over the suggestion that imprisoning innocent people for forty two days is acceptable in a free democracy. Davis deserves our support and respect for this brave decision.
Last night’s debate, and the brave Labour rebels in particular, showed that democrats from across the spectrum care passionately about rights and freedoms. MPs of all parties hold courage and conviction about these values and few more so than David Davis.
Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty
“It is wrong to send someone back to a country where they would face death”
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 3rd, 2006
That’s what Shami Chakrabati said just now on BBC Breakfast.
But is it wrong? People who take advantage of our generosity — criminals of non-British origin — have no right to our protection. They should know what their home country is like and, while this sounds illiberal, they have a choice about whether to commit a crime.
And, shop-lifting is not a minor crime, no matter what Ms. Liberty claims.
Death Penalty
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 22nd, 2005
I’m uncomfortable with the death penalty. It causes two major problems:
1) We absolutely cannot, ever again, execute an innocent person.
2) If we doubt the guilt of a convicted person, are we suggesting there is something wrong with our judicial system?
A three-strikes and you’re dead policy is sometimes advocated (though not in such colourful language) and I have some sympathy with it except….
Except that it doesn’t account for cases of gross, burning-in-hell’s-too-good-for-them acts of inhumanity like this. If we had an elected head of state we could defer judgements like this to him or her, but as we do not I think the safest option is to keep the option open until there is (or elected judges…).

Lethal injection
Cameron wins!
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 6th, 2005
I’m always pleased to bask in correct predictions – see my article on 30 September…
And to celebrate the victory Optimates‘ Daniel Lucraft, Tory Convert and myself have launched The Cameron Leadership.
This blog is the source for information about David Cameron’s stewardship of the Conservative party towards an election victory in 2009 or 2010. I hope you’ll join me there.
Of course GavPOLITICS will continue to report on non-Cameron matters, the EU, England, low-tax economics, science and everything else you have come to expect!
Result due…
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 6th, 2005
The result will be made today…
David Davis declines an English Parliament
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on November 10th, 2005
On the day David Davis announced a U-turn on the Campaign for an English Parliament (www.thecep.org.uk), I am pleased to announce that I posted my vote for Cameron this morning.
I have given my reasons for the need for an English Parliament before. For details click here.
David Davis Campaign Meeting
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on November 5th, 2005
I attended a meeting today in Burgess Hill’s Mid Sussex Conservative Club between David Davis and Conservatives from West Sussex.
David Davis started badly. His speech was an amalgam of answers he gave on Thursday night’s Question Time with some more taken from his earlier speeches. It must be hard, I suppose, to always come up with something new when making a speech, but two days after Question Time is too soon to make the same joke with the same wording.
Then his speech finished, he started fielding questions and he showed why so many MPs are supporting him. His answers were correct, clear and showed why he is a leadership contender. He made references to policies on taxation, Europe (properly the EU), education, emmigration and crime. He explained how the Conservatives can win the next election and why non-Conservatives have in the past voted Conservative.
But.
There is a but.
In 2001 Michael Portillo entered a similar meeting held in Hove and everyone stopped. Portillo’s mere presence in a large garden made the conversation stop and all attention turn to him.
When Davis entered the room, I could not tell you, there was no similar hush. At one point Davis was standing next to me and I did not notice. When the formalities started he was introduced by Tim Loughton, my MP. Tim spoke and everyone listened in raptured silence. Now I admit, and I hope he doesn’t read this, Tim is an excellent MP, and he should be a leadership contender in the future, but he upstaged Davis. Tim has the charisma that Davis should have if he wants to persuade the general public. Davis’ policies are spot on, and Tim’s too; but Cameron, like Tim does, carries an audience with him.
Cameron’s performance on Thursday was not polished, but the public like him.
Never-be-converted socialists have told me that they do not want Cameron to win because he will beat Labour in 2009 or 2010.
Policies are not enough. In the May 2005 election the Tory’s policies were better than Labour’s. In 1997 the Labour manifesto was patently a lie from cover to cover, but you could have been forgiven for believing it. In 2005 that excuse was gone. The differentiator between the Tories and Labour from the public’s perspective was not policies, it was character. Whatever lies Blair told, whatever injustice he allowed his Chancellor to perpetrate, people liked and believed Blair. Cameron can bring that, and only that one hopes, to the Tories.
Having seen Davis in the flesh I commend, in the strongest terms, Cameron. As does the DailyPropaganda.
Low tax – not low spend
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on November 4th, 2005
“Do you remember the Yes Minister TV series, watching Sir Humphrey take every opportunity to inflate his already vast number of civil servants? For this Government, it isn’t so much a comedy as a training video. Last year alone, the Government added 27,000 bureaucrats – equivalent to one quarter of the British Army.”
This is a quote from an article on the Conservative website and it is the central plank of Labour’s lies on the economy. They say that if the Conservatives spend less the quality of public services will go down. They also say that if you lower taxes government revenue will go down.
Unfortunately for the duped electorate, neither of these things are true. In countries with lower taxes and considerate governments, public spending can be increased by lowering taxes because lower taxes create a stronger economy. Gordon Brown’s much lauded non-boom and bust economy is actually better suited to Conservative management – lower taxes and better spending – than was the boom and bust economy (if, in fact it has gone at all).
In the debate last night David Davis took examples from around the world and, indeed, Europe that have benefited from visionary, radical and sensible spending and taxation policies.
But the argument about tax levels and the resulting scope for public spending must be had in isolation from the argument that must be made about the allocation of funds. In budget speeches made by Brown he lists the “representations” he has had to cut or increase spending and seeks applause and media attention for publicly refusing to comply with each representation. But if there is twice as much being spent on the NHS at point x, regardless of latency, why aren’t the services being provided twice as good? Why are they not even one and a half times as good?
The answer trotted out by politicians on all sides is that the services need reform. Reform is a useful term which can mean PFIs, reorganising the PCTs or, as in the current Government’s case, both these plus employing thousands of useless bureaucrats.
This year alone the government’s public services that have received so much extra funding have wasted £9m on art in hospitals; £20,000 on green ribbons that will apparently show "solidarity" with the local Muslim population in Nottinghamshire.
In February 2004 the (not-so) Independent newspaper said:
With polls suggesting voters think public services are in worse shape than when Labour came to power,
the Government will have to show it can make the current pot of money go further. The political imperative will be even greater as taxes increase over the next five years to meet Gordon Brown’s fiscal rules and pay for the rise in spending we have already seen.
We know, of course, that Gordon Brown has fiddled his ‘Golden Rule’ to avoid the Independent’s prediction but that’s not the worst of it. If crime continues to rise, hospital service and educational standards continue to fail and government projects continue to come in over budget the public will ask, in stronger and stronger terms, what the government is doing with the tax they are taking – the highest burden in a long time.
David Cameron got it right when he said that the tax burden on businesses must be reduced now and the increases in public service spending can be delivered from the inevitable increased proceeds as well as from the removal of waste. If the Conservatives, by the Independent’s own admission, were running the country more efficiently in 1997 on far lower taxes, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that it will not again at the next election.




