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.
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Jane Dodds to step down as Welsh Lib Dem Leader (Caron Lindsay)
-
The silent scandal of ME…and in praise of Tessa Munt (Paul Walter)
-
The Lib Dems should be bolder. Here’s how…. (James Hill)
-
Before we talk about coalition, we must ask: What are the Liberal Democrats for? (Maria Linforth-Hall)
-
Support to enable Disabled People to live Independently (Richard Whelan)
Jane Dodds stands down as Welsh Lib Dem leader
The straight and narrow path to Marzipan Tunnel
A U-turn too far
Recent Comments
Rob Heale
The boldest option would be to adhere to our aims set out in the Party Constitution to be free from poverty. People living in poverty can rarely be free because...
Chris Moore
Battling on against the current with scarce means or attention from the media. Excellent radical liberal focussing on the issues that really matter. An...
Adam
4,700 Jewish soldiers fought for the Prussian army in the Franco Prussian war. They fought with distinction - many of them received the Iron Cross. When Germany...
Paul
Thank you Jane for your tireless work over the last decade. You stood for leader when it would have been easier not to, you’ve fought elections when it would ...- Adam
"The problem is that being ‘understanding’ of anti-immigrant views led to the holocaust." This is both wrong, and bloody insulting to those German Jews w...
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.