Davis: I quit to stop Tory U-turn on 42 days

In the first hour after David Davis quit as an MP last Thursday, I suggested the reason underpinning his decision:

Mr Davis recognised that the Tories’ influential neo-cons in the shadow cabinet, George Osborne and Michael Gove, would much rather have backed the Government over 42 days: only tactical considerations of defeating Labour in the Commons persuaded they and Mr Cameron to rally behind Mr Davis’s stand. But none of them, it seems, wanted to fight the proposal through the House of Lords, and try and defeat it again when it returns to the Commons.

Now David Davis has come as close as he is ever likely to do publicly in admitting this was the case:

‘I thought, that means Gordon Brown will take it to the Parliament Act [to force 42 days through], and I won’t be able to stop it because it will be closer to an election – his party will be more disciplined. There are those members – and there are some in my party – who worry about it … It would be harder for us to maintain the line. There is only so much you can do in politics.’

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in News and Parliamentary by-elections.
Advert

6 Comments

  • So what?
    Patrick Wall believed in free speech.I believe in free speech,but if Wall had resigned his seat to fight a by-election on a free speech platform I would never have voted for him.
    Since so many Tories believe in 42 days it is hard to how Davis’ actions will stop it or split the Conservatives.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Hywel
    @Jana - hence the word 'blanket' As it stands a political party cannot discriminate against someone for a belief 'worthy of respect in a democratic society, ...
  • Jason Connor
    Well said Chris Nicholson. What an encouraging post and for recognising that party's blatant anti semitism....
  • Jana
    @Hywel “ It is inherently nonsensical for a blanket prohibition on discrimination on the grounds of belief to apply to political parties which are founded on...
  • Hywel
    " 65 seats on 8% is a possible outcome which would see us overrepresented significantly under fptp." That may be possible. The actual electoral arithmetic g...
  • Chris Nicholson
    Theakes, nowhere does that article say there was a coalition or a confidence and supply agreement so there is no agreement for us ‘to pull out of forthwith’...