So you’re thinking of running a candidate against David Davis because you support 42 days detention without trial. And you think it would be a good idea for that person to be the victim of an act of terrorism. Who do you think of? Umm … in this case, someone who has actually been a persistent and vocal opponent of 42 days detention without trial. Genius.
Share:- Most Read
- Recent Comments
- Op-eds
Search
Liberal Democrat Voice is an independent, collaborative website run by Liberal Democrat activists,
where any individual inside or outside the party can express their views. Views expressed on this website are those of the
individuals who express them and may not reflect those of the party.
Poll
-
Adult Social Care Roadshow To Visit Libraries Across Cambridgeshire
-
Adult Social Care Roadshow To Visit Libraries Across Cambridgeshire
-
What Lib Dem members think about Europe, Cameron's 'veto', and the Eurozone
-
Garston Park Art Project - next steps
-
West End Community Council - my February Update
-
New Who Post On Mindless Ones
-
Boltzmann And Boltzwomann
-
'This NHS Bill is Bad...' My latest blog post for The Huffington Post!
-
A departure from tradition at the Islington Liberal Democrats new year party...
-
Friday favourite 45
6 Comments
“A very public sociologist” made a very good suggestion at the comments section:
“If Luke Akehurst is so keen on 42 days why doesn’t he volunteer himself to be Labour’s candidate?”
Because it is too far away,and thus impractical, apparently.
Well, thank you very much for the link. I am now asking readers to say whether they think I should go and campaign with DD, so would be interested to know what people think on that subject.
“Because it is too far away, and thus impractical, apparently.”
But he thought it wouldn’t have been too far away for you? Interesting.
He didn’t mention me specifically, he just wanted a survivor or family member affected by 7/7, as a symbolic DD battering ram. What that person thought or felt or where they lived was clearly far less important than what they could be spun as representing.
In other words, he wanted to wave other people’s wounds for his party’s own political purposes
My own opinion: DD is so dodgy on too many civil liberties issues to be supported. Admittedly, if his stance really creates a proper debate on 42 days, that may start something beyond his control. But I’d have thought the points, Rachel, you have to say don’t need the by-election to give them publicity. And, Mark, thanks for the link to such an impressive blog.
“I am now asking readers to say whether they think I should go and campaign with DD, so would be interested to know what people think on that subject.”
As you asked, no.
I can’t see into David Davis’s mind, so I can’t really tell why he is doing this. But I can see that, logically, it can not be a principled stance, because he supports detention without charge for 28 days.
He feels it’s acceptable for people to be locked up without charge for 4 weeks, but not for 6 weeks. That’s something, I suppose, but it doesn’t seem to me like a reason for _positively_ supporting him.
In fact I wish somebody who was _really_ committed to civil liberties would stand against him and put the case for reducing the period of detention without charge below 28 days.
Because if no one is making that case, the authoritarians are really having it all their own way.