Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Tories ridiculed as Davis quits to force by-election over terror laws

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 13 June 2008
THE Tories were ridiculed as a "party in disarray" last night after David Davis, the shadow home secretary, resigned over the new terror laws.
Mr Davis quit in protest one day after the government won a Commons vote on increasing the detention of terrorist suspects to 42 days, plunging the fortunes of his leader David Cameron into crisis.

In what was being interpreted as a massive own goal, Mr Davis announced he was standing down to re-contest his Yorkshire parliamentary seat on the basis of the "strangulation of fundamental British freedoms".

His actions immediately deflected attention from the troubles of Gordon Brown, the beleaguered Prime Minister, who had to rely on the votes of nine Northern Irish MPs to get the measures passed after 36 Labour back-benchers voted against the government.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said the Tories were in "total disarray" while David Blunkett, the former home secretary, described Mr Davis's behaviour as "childish and immature."

Hilary Benn, the UK environment secretary, said: "I don't understand what he is hoping to achieve by this. The Conservative Party is in disarray over national security."

Mr Cameron issued a clipped statement that made clear it was a "personal decision" for Mr Davis to stand down. He immediately promoted Dominic Grieve from shadow attorney-general to replace Mr Davis.

Mr Grieve, who said he had no intention of standing down if his predecessor is returned in a by-election – expected next month – said it was a "highly individual decision".

Mr Davis, who will defend a 5,116 majority in Haltemprice and Howden, was forced to make his statement outside Parliament after the Speaker refused him permission to address the Commons.

His task will be made easier by the decision of Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg not to field a candidate. Labour had not decided whether to enter the race.

In extraordinary scenes, Mr Davis said it was "incumbent" upon him to take a stand against the erosion of civil liberties, including 42 days' detention without charge, ID cards, CCTV cameras and computer databases.

Mr Davis said Mr Cameron had warned him that resigning was "very risky". But "iron entered my soul" after seeing how the government won the vote. "I do not think the Archangel Gabriel could have talked me out of it at that point," he said.

Shami Chakrabarti, the director of the civil liberties body Liberty, said: "When David told me about his decision, I tried to talk him out of it."

Labour MP Barry Sheerman said: "At best, it is vanity politics, at worst it is cynical manipulation by the Conservatives."

No deal with DUP, claims Brown

GORDON Brown insisted yesterday he had done "no deal" with Democratic Unionists to secure vital support for his 42-day terror detention without charge proposals.

The controversial measure was narrowly approved by the Commons by just nine votes on Wednesday thanks to the support of the DUP after 36 Labour MPs rebelled.

But the Prime Minister rejected claims that he had bought their backing, or that of some Labour MPs, with promises of action on issues such as extra cash for Northern Ireland.

He said at his Downing Street press conference: "There was no deal. There was no deal with the Democratic Unionist Party, no deal with the Ulster unionists generally.

"And I think for people to imply that is to take away from the strength of the argument about the need to tackle terrorism."

Mr Brown continued: "People in Northern Ireland know what happens with terrorism."

Suggesting the DUP backed the government only because of offered incentives was "impugning the reputation of people who are concerned about terrorism", he said.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

13/06/2008 00:47:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

somerferg,

perth 13/06/2008 01:06:23
#2 hear, hear and your comments are also informative and interesting :)
3

Pat Scot,

Albernia 13/06/2008 01:12:19
It's been a while since I thought I could voice admiration for a tory.

This is probably a futile gesture by Davis, but I used to think Labour were more supportive of civil liberty than the tories, and I'm surprised that a tory is taking such a stance.

Davis is now somewhat of a rebel in his party, who overtly opposed the increased detention. He's saying that their opposition is not enough. It looks like a principled stance, but might be a long term positioning for leadership.

The Lib Dems are standing aside for him, in one of their target seats. This may be naive on their part, or (I hope) an expression of support on the issue of liberty, which is one of their main planks.

I hope this influences the Lords and then the Commons to reject this disgraceful proposal on detention.
4

Dougie, Edinburgh,

13/06/2008 01:22:17
Of course anything any politician does will be ridiculed by political opponents. A journalist however should be more impartial.
5

Jock MacSprog,

13/06/2008 01:40:49
they were only riduculed by Labour who of course would say that but in reality are cr++ping themselves at the prospect. Public opinion from all political persuasions has been supportive. Interesting that the Scotsman is one of the few news organs to run with this angle of spin on the story. Others are lauding Davis.
6

Otis Boone,

Sacramento 13/06/2008 02:52:08
I read that one can't resign from Parliament, rather that one must be appointed to a lesser peerage, Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds or something like that, in order to leave.

So how can someone in a "shadow government," which I take to mean someone pretending he has a job, resign?
7

donald,

glasgow 13/06/2008 06:04:32
Tories ridiculed by Labour? How is that possible?
8

Jimmy the Pie,

13/06/2008 06:23:24
#2 Traquir

Another superb posting.

If only the Hootsmoan had journalists of your calibre.
9

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 13/06/2008 06:26:24
It is now 6.20 a.m. BST and #2 Traquir hasn't been censored yet. What on earth will the proprietor say? Or is someone going to come out with the truth and tell us what is going on when a story that has been all over the English media is cut dead everywhere in Scotland? Is someone going to protest that that is a perfectly spontaneous editorial judgement and hasn't been centrally organised? After all, we do have a free press, don't we?

10

Chalmers,

13/06/2008 06:36:03
The latest Scottish voting intention sub-sample is the first occasion in modern times (about 50 years?) that the Scottish Tories have drawn level with the Labour Party in Scotland (AFAIAA). In addition to being level with the Tories on %age vote, Labour would fall behind the Lib Dems to 3rd place in terms of seats, by Martin Baxter’s reckoning.

The detailed data-sheets from the June Populus poll for The Times were released yesterday (a tad late under BPC rules, by my reckoning… ). Usual caveats regarding sub-samples of GB-wide polls apply.

Populus/Times
Westminster voting intention - Scotland
Sample size: 136
Fieldwork: 6-8 June 2008

1. SNP 36% (+18%)
2= Con 22% (+6%)
2= Lab 22% (-17%)
4. LD 16% (-7%)
5. Grn 2% (+1%)
6. BNP 1% (+1%)
oth 1%

Giving, according to Electoral Calculus, a seat distribution of:

1. SNP 38 seats (+32 seats)
2. LD 8 seats (-3 seats)
3. Lab 7 seats (-33 seats)
4. Con 5 seats (+4 seats)
5. Speaker (Michael Martin) 1 seat (n/c)

http://populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-080608-The-Times-The-Times-Poll—June-2008.pdf

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll_scot.html

Things are looking dire, dire, dire for Gordon Brown and Wendy Alexander at next years’ Euros. (If they both make it that far.) 3rd place behind the Scottish Tories is now looking a distinct probability at the Euros.
11

SouthernSkye,

Bonnie Bonn 13/06/2008 07:11:35
I think anything to divert attention from the behind-the-scenes-deals done to get this piece of tripe through is the Labour tactic. Mr Davis deserves respect for having a position of principle and be willing to put his head on the block over it.
12

steve 1511,

aberdeen 13/06/2008 07:17:37
the hootsman is unable to even get the parties names right,it is labour who are in dissary,as herr brown and the labour stasi party are reduced to govern this country by buying votes, labour in westminster is reduced to operating as a party in a banana republic,nothing new there as they bribe their way in government,onward goes labour into oblivion with broon and wee wendy the bung hanging on to his coat tails
13

Bigwull,

edinburgh 13/06/2008 08:02:59
A tory with principles shock, still laughing at Tories defending human rights, if it were left up to them we'd still have serfdom
14

beckypumps1,

Fife 13/06/2008 08:03:47
2 Traquir

Maybe you could get a job at the hootsman between bans.
Another good read many thanks.
15

Alannah,

13/06/2008 08:09:56
What a fantastic waste of taxpayer money holding a by-election to satisfy the political games of the Tories. Labour may have lost the plot on terrorism, but the Tories can only offer gimmicks in return.
16

Fenland Farmer,

Cromwells England 13/06/2008 08:10:21
In the day's of talking lamp post's, dustbin Inspector's,Health & Saftey Police, CCTV, ID cards etc all of which are for our own good, a man of the Westminister Parliament resigns on a matter of principle. Not ony resigns but gives up his seat and ask's the people for help ie debate and then turn out and vote.
Third rate Nu labour deride him. Tory grandee's deride him. All continue to play games and hide expenses..thank you!
For over 800 years following a "review meeting" between an English King who "knew best" and his English Baron's, our Civil Liberties have been mostly protected.
England awake..support this man. Send a clear message to Brown & his lackey's, send a clear message to the Eton boy's...IT'S TIME! (apologies for pinching this slogan from Scotland...8))
Well done that man!
17

,

13/06/2008 08:10:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 08:14:10
2 Traquir
Like so mant others you appear to be fixated with some concept of how long North sea oil will last. This is not the issue. The real issue is the rate of production. There may be oil extracted from the North sea for the next 30,40,50 or 100 years but if the rate of extraction continues to decline at its current rate then the amount will not be significant. To witness this you need only look at the situation elsewhere. There are actually over 20 oil fields in the South and Midlands of England which have been producing oil for decades but they are not considered to be significant and most people don't even know they exist. Similarly Romania has been producing oil for over 70 years but is not really considered as an oil producing nationand is hardly awash with oil revenues

The stark reality is that the rate North sea oil production has fallen to less than 50% of its 1999/2000 peak and is continuing to fall. Also , as the recent RBS statement mentioned, investment is being "eroded" by higher costs meaning that investment is falling in real terms so there is no current prospect of the decline in the rate of production being reversed. These are the real concerns which have to be addressed not some notional concept of the amount of reserves or life span.

If you don't accept my account look up the RBS monthly oil index statement for yourself.
19

Citylocal Fife,

Fife News 13/06/2008 08:14:24
The good news is that the 'bargaining' with non Labour MP's, which swung the vote, will now be exposed. This could turn into another tragedy for Gordon Brown.

Perhaps if Gordon Brown feels so confident, he should resign his Fife seat and challenge David Davis in the by-election.


Yours etc

Angus Whitton
20

Courtney,

East Molesey 13/06/2008 08:17:38
Welcome back David Icke!
21

Victoria,

East Lothian 13/06/2008 08:18:09
Agree with most of the posts - is only Labour ridiculing Tories over this, and of course only Labour would ridiculr someone for taking a stance on an issue of importance, they're not used to people they can't buy off in some way. I have a new found respect for David Davis and am glad to see the Lib Dems have had the decency to support this strong statement against the authoritarian leanings of the Labour party and their DUP partners in crime.
22

Jimmy the Pie,

13/06/2008 08:19:26
Found this interesting article in the Herald
;)

Apparently the Scottish press are delighted with the detention
limit being extended to 42 days, as they now have the ability
to further extend the detention (9 days so far) of the major
Scottish story who's name dare not be spoken, "North Sea
oil 'will last for another half century' "
see - tinyurl.com/6ml3np

Despite this unwarranted and scandalous detention the papers
have forgotten one thing we are now in the 21st century not the
20th. Suppression of major information to this degree would
have worked in the 70's ( and apparently it did very effectively
- see McCrone tinyurl.com/3sdrdg ),
but in the Internet age it just looks plain dumb.

As several bloggers have noted at this point many of the
comments are much more interesting than many of
the actual news stories. At this point there is effectively
a virtual vibrant and passionately driven CyberNat
newspaper living in the rotting corpse of the once proud
and independent Scottish newspapers.
They are basically being eaten from the inside out
which will speed their inevitable demise and hopefully
from the ashes will rise a truly independent Scottish
paper which focuses on Scottish interests first
and foremost.

The quality of content from our Cybernat journalists
is increasing as quickly as the quality of the content
of their journalists is declining. A few samples of
recent Cybernat articles are :

Jimbo @ 10:54pm
Carbon capture
see - tinyurl.com/6aft5j

An t-Amadan @ 4:40pm
BBC Bias Exposé
see - tinyurl.com/5sjpfo

Alex Porter @ 3:14pm
Restrictions of freedoms under labour
see - tinyurl.com/55rean

Scunnert @ 5:59pm
Global Detention Policies
see - tinyurl.com/55rean

We have a fire in our bellies, whereas they have no stomach,
no spine and zero credibility.

Saor Alba
23

Willie,

Lochaber 13/06/2008 08:23:21
Standing up for Britains Freedoms?
What a load of drivel.
Isn't it a tiny bit late.
Wasn't it the Tories that brought that other populist freedom in?
Internment without Trial in Northern Ireland!
Then there is the posts that talk about Labour's oblivion?
Wishful thinking!!
When general elections come round we all start remembering the good old days.
Like Poll tax for Scotland, Black Wednesday and interest rate of 15%, futile wars like Suez, petrol escalator of 3% above inflation, and Rosyth where a supposed £5 million difference lost the trident contract only for the taxpayer to pay £900million to make Devenport safe. and it goes on and on.....
The SNP have started well but the cuts are beginning to bite and next year they will be worse and they will make more mistakes then they won't be so popular.
So oblivion.
Oh my sainted aunt I don't think so.
24

Gdgy,

dundy 13/06/2008 08:25:19
How embarassing for the tories....
Davis makes a stand for principled behaviour and in support of British fairness - how are they going to manage to govern?
I think Davis got bored of playing the wait and see opposition game and wanted to be the "main feature" again...
25

,

13/06/2008 08:35:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
26

,

13/06/2008 08:36:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 08:44:45
25 Jimmy the Pie
Is this posting the same as that which appeared under the name Traquir for posting 2?

If so plase read my response to part of it (#21)
28

Willie,

lochaber 13/06/2008 08:46:15
Hero or Villian?
If 42 days reduces the chance of some home grown or otherwise terrorist blowing me or someone I love , or another innocent human being up I'm all for it.
This is an exercise in semantics.
29

,

13/06/2008 08:47:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

gwp,

Glasgow 13/06/2008 08:53:49
I suggest that Davis's actions are of a self seeking publicist carrying out a publicity stunt. I do not care what party he is with but I suspect it is easy to 'resign' and then reapply when you have done 'behind the scenes' negotiation to ensure that you will be the only political candidate for the post.

Surely it is for him to repreent the wishes of his constituents not his own personal views - if, as the polls suggest, the public appear supportive he should be taking that into account.

All his 'stunt' serves is to further drain the public purse with a 'mock' election, which you and I pay for, that achieves nothing.

I hope that soemone stands against him and he loses his seat. If he is 'principled' enough to resign then he should not be immediately returning. He should go and do something more useful instead.
31

,

13/06/2008 09:02:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

Think First ,

Planet Earth 13/06/2008 09:10:31
Oh my "god" a politician with principles’ there is still hope for us all
33

Doh,

13/06/2008 09:14:24


Although I oppose the 42-day detention - it is of course the Labour rebels that should be resigning from the Labour party in disgust.

As for Davis - this is gesture politics - if I was Labour I would not fight the by-election - it is a waste of taxpayers money.
34

Alan B,

13/06/2008 09:21:28
Cannot understand the negativity round David Davis actions. It seems like a principled stand.

Browns actions in forcing through the 42days (6 weeks) detention without charge are been beneeth contempt.

Firstly if u are going to push a policy like this u have to make sure u have clear support for it. Bribing mps with promises of additional money and project for their constituencies is just wrong.

The biggest problem i have with this is not actually the 42 days per se. But more the fact this government more than any other have proved so untrustworthy.

Their is a cancer at the heart of labour and they are almost proving that those that want this power are the ones i would least trust with it.

This government is so corrupt both financially and morally and never seems to put what is right before their narrow party interests.

The detension of a pensioner at a labour party conference on anti terror laws shows this government cannot be trusted with these laws. When this happened there should have been sackings and resignations and disiplinary procedings taken against those responsible for this clear breach of power.

The fact that there was not speaks so loudly.
35

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 13/06/2008 09:30:38
Not surprising that Labour are ridiculing - that is after all they can do. Interesting to note how all their campaigns in recent times have been negative ones (Crewe by-election, Scotland a 'basket case economically' - you will lose £5000).

To that Labour drone mentality that can only ridicule it:

1) It costs public money, Labour bleat.
Wow. I didn't know Labour cared so much for public money considering how they tried to hide revealing expenses and just how wasteful they are with brand new kitchens and just about anything. Just hypocritical nonsense.

2) It's a 'stunt' not principled, declares Labour.
Labour are self destructing nicely. This move doesn't help the Tories. Indeed it pressurises them to change the 42 day law when in power, something they might not want to do. Davis has lost his place in the shadow cabinet and could be out of things altogether if the Tories don't want to revisit the 42 day question. It has potential to open up rifts in the Tory party.

This quite clearly isn't just some 'stunt' to embarass Labour (who don't need any help in making themselves look dumb). Could it actually be that this is an issue Davis actually feels strongly about? He has been passionate about this for sometime - and people are generally crediting him for forcing Cameron & Co to strongly oppose this.

I know there is a mentality around that mindlessly ascribes the worst motives possible to anyone on a different part of the political spectrum - but this is a reflection of unintelligent prejudice.
36

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 13/06/2008 09:39:28
Headline should read "Scotsman Newspaper Journalists Ridiculed Once AGAIN For False Reporting and Distorting The Facts AGAIN To Appease The Labour Masters"

All the political comments I watched and read last night felt it was a brave move and going to further embarrass the government by dragging out the issue and creating further division in the labour party.

I personally am not 100% convinced by the resignation but the man stood up took a chance for a cause be said he believes in. Labour called that "unhinged".

Everyone in Westminster knows what the labour Whips were doing all day before the vote and how many times the DUP increased the stakes for cooperation. Now they have the brass neck to claim otherwise.

Liars with no morality. The sooner we leave Westminster the better its full of pathetic parasites.
37

WL,

livingston 13/06/2008 09:39:45
If David Davis wants to resign from the House of Commons because he does not agree with decisions taken there, that is his good right. But then he should not stand for in the by-election he is causing. Elections are not toys. And he is wasting taxpayers' money.
38

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 13/06/2008 09:42:11
David Davis may be a maverick, and his gamble is a huge one, but I watched his speech in the Commons debate on the 42-day legislation, and it was masterly and full of passionate commitment. I, for one, respect his courage and his commitment. We are sliding inexorably towards a police state, a surveillance society: Big Brother is with us now and his name is Gordon Brown.

As for the pathetic group that once used to be the Labour Party, by their friends shall we now know them - George Bush, the DUP, Anne Widdecombe, UKIP and Kelvin McKenzie.
39

Yeah1,

13/06/2008 09:42:13
#13 Chalmers:

Not sure where on earth you got those poll results but they appear to be completely made up.

The link you gave to the supposed poll doesn't work, but having been on the Populus website and looked at their latest poll (June 4-6) there is no mention of the Scottish polls that you have stated.

Perhaps you could direct me to where those polls are, since the link you gave doesn't work, or you could admit that they are perhaps figments of your imagination?
40

Alan B,

13/06/2008 09:46:01
#WL

I think the problem is how should politicians react to what labour are doing here. This is a fundamental piece of legislation. Labour have not been able to win fairly. They have bribed some of their own mps with promises of projects within their constituencies.

Their maybe an argument for 42 days but labour have not won the argument and have sunk so low in securing vicotry in the vote.

As some mps have reported, labour mps were told to vote for this not becuase it was right but because brown could not afford to lose. That really is no way to construct terrorism laws.

Good luck to davis.
41

Steve_HMFC,

13/06/2008 09:49:52
#8

Yes, an MP cant resign so actually has to get the Chancellor to appoint him as a Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds. Because it is an office of the crown(only symbolical), this invalidates the MP's parliamentary office.

Wonder if Alastair Darling knew before 'Call me Dave' Cameron lol? Nick Clegg seemed too...
42

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 09:54:03
Interesting slant this morning from two of my English colleagues. They say that Brown, being a Scot, has no conception of English freedoms like Magna Carta.

Incidentally, 42 days is even worse than China, where you can only be held for up to 39 days without charge. The principle of freedom under the law is the cornerstone of any civilised society. Davis may be eccentric and egocentric but in the by-election there is a simple choice between freedom and an overmighty state. All men and women of goodwill should vote for freedom.
43

The Honest Lad,

Musselburgh 13/06/2008 09:54:38
I would rather be safe than sorry. If the police and security services say they need extra time to interogate / investigate these nutters then fair play and I am glad it has been passed. People who live and abide by the law have nothing to fear so therefore it makes not a bit of diffrence. When they arrest these people there is no doubt no smoke without fire and the people they are arresting are no doubt involved in some shape or form.
44

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 09:57:33
#44 Yeah 1
The links to pdf files in some polling organisations are often poor, but the link to the Populus file is up and working. Chalmers's references are correct.
45

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 10:00:42
PS To my #50

Try populus.co.uk
When you're in the populus site, go to poll archive, then to the latest poll.
46

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 10:09:01
In 1971, Brian Faulkner, the P.M. of Northern Ireland, and Ted Heath, the U.K. Conservative Prime Minister, reintroduced internment without trial after IRA bombing atrocities in Belfast.

It was claimed that, after hundreds of suspected IRA terrorists and sympathisers were interned without
trial, this one decision only inflamed the situation in Ulster and acted as a recruiting sergeant for the IRA!

The 42 day measure covers all forms of terrorism but everyone knows it is aimed at British Muslims. The government better hope that it doesn't backfire and only lead to more young Muslims becoming radicalised?
47

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 13/06/2008 10:11:05
Not just the 42 day thing , someone needs to stand up to restrictions imposed by this political correctness drivel, signs that flash at me when I am driving at the speed limit etc etc .
48

JoeMiddleton,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 10:18:19
I applaud David Davis's decision, it's good to see a politician standing up for his principles for once.
49

Yeah1,

13/06/2008 10:25:27
#52

Yes as I said thats what I did. I went to populas.co.uk, selected 'latest poll' and downloaded the detailed results. There is no mention anywhere of the polling figures that Chalmers gives.
50

Steve Foley,

England 13/06/2008 10:29:24
It is amazing how the spinmeisters will put their own twist on an event according to their political bias.

To me David Davis has shown some things which are missing in most politicians of all parties, integrity and personal courage and I wish him well.

Resignation and re-election over a principle is a very risky strategy. It worked for Dick Taverne in Lincoln in 1973 and all but one of the Unionist MPs against the Anglo-Irish Agreement, but cost Sir Richard Acland his seat at Gravesend in the 1950s and Bruce Douglas-Mann his in Mitcham in 1983.

I commend the Liberals for not contesting the by-election and salute David Davis for his courage and hope that he is returned with an increased majority.

Now the really interesting aspect will be if the large Tory lead in recent opinion polls maintains as confirmed by their Local Election and Crewe and Nantwich victories, or will the "sheep" let the Media do their thinking for them and swing back to Labour in line with the press?
51

Sedov,

Scotland 13/06/2008 10:33:33
Principle my a***. This about personal ego and needing attention. A great PR stunt in anyone's book. If this was a marginal you can bet that Davis would not have taken the chance, as it is with New Labour so popular he will get in again and this is a great move for him and his own personal ambitions and got nought to do with the 42 days issue.
52

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 13/06/2008 10:38:34
David Davies is the only principled politician I have seen in my lifetime. His stance is heroic and I wish him every success in crushing this hideous Labour government and its un-elected Prime Minister.
53

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 10:46:29
#56 Yeah 1
It is there. It's on page 2 of a 31 page pdf file.

It just may be that you can't get into the Populus psdf files. I find it almost impossible to get into YouGov pdf files.
Publius
54

bluehead,

edinburgh 13/06/2008 10:56:09
as we all know a politician with true honesty ,integrity and principal is as rare as a penny black stamp.
I must salute David Davis for his stance it must be crystal clear what terrible damage has been done to this country by the labour goverment,they have stunk out every thing,
this once great country is on it's way down the lavvy pan.
the crunch of the jackboot heels marching down the high streets will soon be loud enough for all to hear
55

The Honest Lad,

Musselburgh 13/06/2008 10:56:50
51 Methalion,
I hope a bomb never harms you or your family because someone had to be released because the security services never had enough time to investigate them properly.

As said previously better safe than sorry.
56

Matt there,

somewhere 13/06/2008 11:02:47
Labour stands, loses election, Brown is doomed.

Labour refuses to syand, Labour seen as frit, Brown is doomed.

Doomed if he does, doomed if he doesn't.

Pitiful Brown.
57

Fairfax,

13/06/2008 11:07:10
Publius (48): "They say that Brown, being a Scot, has no conception of English freedoms like Magna Carta."

What legal rights did Scots have before 1707? If I recall correctly, the Scottish Crown had far greater powers to impose taxes and imprison subjects than in England.
58

Schot,

13/06/2008 11:11:46
Davis is likely to get reelected as a backbencher. The tories seem likely to win the next UK election, and Davis would have been in charge of the home-office. That would have allowed him to rollback all the CCTV and council snooping he is complaining about unless David Cameron had stopped him. So assuming Davis isn't a fool, his resignation isn't as a MP but as a home-secretary under David Cameron. It is internal tory party jostling that has only served to distract from the Labour/DUP bribe and the civil liberties issues.

Which seems to suggest Cameron won't be curtailing CCTV or inhibiting council snoops.
59

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 11:12:34
#64 Fairfax (good nom de plum; Fairfax was a successful general in the civil war. He was on the parliamentary side but much more liberal than Cromwell.)
Brown is an authoritarian, but - unlike my English friends and collagues - I don't think his Scottishness has anything to do with his authoritarianism. I think it is because of his own personality, his upbringing in a manse, and his socialism.
60

J.M.,

Cupar 13/06/2008 11:16:31
This article, penned by someone called Ross Lydall, apparently the Political Editor of the Scotsman, is about as lacking in journalistic integrity as a left wing paper would dare. The headline, "Tories ridiculed ..etc", might suggest the considered opinion of some respected political commentator. What we discover is that those whose sage opinion is held up to us as being worthy of our consideration are a trio of champagne socialist politicians whose opinions would be swiftly discarded by an objective investigation.

Blunkett, serial philanderer and failed cabinet minister. Hilary Benn wealthy and ineffectual political poseur. Jacqui Smith, pleasant woman, promoted in the interests of political correctness, but clearly only a mouthpiece for Mr Brown. One thing that they can all claim, however, is personal, inside experience of a "party in total disarray".

The big question Mr Lydall should have been asking and examining in detail is whether the Labour Party will have the guts to oppose Mr Davis at the hustings. The description of Mr Davis' "clipped statement" was a ridiculous twisting of the facts. His statement was measured and convincing. It outlined in damning detail the erosion of liberty in this land, giving cause for all but blinkered socialists like Mr Lydall cause for concern.
61

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 11:27:23
57 Steve/ 59 Mikko
Is David Davis principled or is he still upset at being beaten by David Cameron in the leadership election and looking for a means of indulging his vanity. I don't know the answer but if he genuinely wanted to kill off this legislation surley the best way would have been to to as much as he could to ensure that the Tories are elected and so are in a position to do so.

As it is he has put the Tories in a potentially very awkward position. The former editor of the Sun, Kelvin McKenzie, feels that the 42 day legislation is supported by the majority of the British people and has stated that he may stand against Davis in the by election. We may therefore have McKenzie standing on a populist platform against a senior Tory. Whatever the outcome might be it is difficult to see how this could help the Tory cause so what is Davis actually trying to achieve apart from making things harder for the man who beat him to the leadership.
62

Tarchin,

Lothian 13/06/2008 11:40:50
# 13 Chalmers. A sample size of 136 has little if any staistical significance, I think you would require a sample size of several hundred, perhaps a few thousand, before you could draw any meaningful conclusions.

I don't think that David Davis has ever recovered from being defeated by David Cameron for the Tory leadership.
63

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 11:42:48
61 bluehead
Penny Blacks are actually not all that rare unless you are looking for a mint one in excellent condition.

You can buy a used Penny Black for about £50. Actually I now see your point - you can probably buy many politicians for a lot less.
64

kimba,

13/06/2008 11:54:20
David Davis is a true leader, he,unlike others in the political world really does care!
65

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 11:58:53
"Tories were ridiculed as a "party in disarray"

By members of the LABOUR party---who are the biggest joke around.

And they are incompetent
And they are liars
And they are the party of the nanny state
And they have nazi tendencies
66

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 12:04:17
For the first time I can remember, I agree with Kimba.

What David Davis has done helps to restore my faith in political honesty and decency. He's a credit to his party and to his country. I hope he wins triumphantly.
67

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 12:04:18
#69 You are right about the small sample size ... BUT all UK wide polls on voting intentions for the next UK general election are showing similar trends in their Scottish samples. These are (a) collapse of Labour; (b) rise of SNP to lead position; (c) Tory revival but not on the same scale as in England. I think we can take it these trends are happening even if we can't put faith in the exact numbers.
68

kimba,

13/06/2008 12:14:48
73. THANX!
69

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 12:27:20
#49 The Honest Lad

"People who live and abide by the law have nothing to fear"

I wish you were right, but in the last couple of years people have been shot dead by the police, spied on by local authority snoopers while filling their dustbins, had files containing personal and banking details lost by the inland revenue, their DNA stored on databases ... and I could go on. Now the government proposes to detain people for 42 days without charge - the longest period by far in the western world. Even China only detains people for 39 days without charge.

Davis is egocentric and he has chosen an eccentric way to protest at this erosion of our freedoms. But he is right to protest. I hope he is triumphantly re-elected.
70

Saruman,

13/06/2008 12:44:50
And to think that this man looked like becoming Tory leader for long enough! “Eccentric maverick” doesn’t begin to cover it – like many others, I can’t begin to understand what has stance against the “42 day” rule is all about. If ever a hard line needed to be taken against terrorists, it’s now!
71

James.com,

13/06/2008 12:49:00
One Tory shows a bit of independence and the "Tories are in disarray" screams Labour.Is it better to be united and incompetent then?
72

kimba,

13/06/2008 12:53:28
Labour are grasping at straws, they know they are stuffed,but,any port in a storm!
73

Steve Foley,

England 13/06/2008 12:53:30
Ugly George 68. I take you point, but Davis is to me a true Tory whereas Cameron is the "Blair of the Conservatives" and is trying to do the same to them as was done when Labour became New Labour, scrapping all its principles in the process just to get elected. Cameron has tried the same ploy, ditching Grammar Schools, Hugging a Hoodie, embracing, at least superficially, all the Green Eco-Rubbish, just look at the childish "Green Tree" logo. To my mind there is absolutely no point in being elected if you have sacrificed all your principles to do so.

Davis lost out in the Tory Leadership election because he did not shine in his Conference Speech. Cameron did and was bandwaggoned by the Media and the "sheep" in the Tory Party chose him over Davis who is a far better Tory and an abler man where it counts. I'm afraid it was the triumph of Style over Substance. If as seems likely the Conservatives win the next national General Election in 2009 or more likely 2010 then it will be despite having Cameron as their Leader and owing to the failures of Brown, much as in 1970 they won despite having Ted Heath as their Leader and the failings of the Labour Government under Wilson.
74

Busymale,

13/06/2008 12:57:35
A principled politician at last. That rabble of Labour MP's couldn't find one amongst them.
75

G,

dundy 13/06/2008 13:01:40
Principled????
Where has his conscience been over all the other issues?
We all know that the tories would be four square behind the 42 day detention bill if they were in government - they are playing opposition politics...will David resign his position if they get in and want to bring it back OR will it be OK then...?
76

Alan B,

13/06/2008 13:04:10
#84

What evidence have u got of that? I would suggest none.

77

walter,

13/06/2008 13:07:52
Labour are calling this a stunt and if it was not for Davis's history in I may have myself but I do not believe it is.
If Labour believe it is a stunt why do they not get one of their well known top MPs to stand against him.
What is going to make this by election a farce is the fact that Murdoch is going to fund one his ex editors Mackenzie to stand.
78

Boab,

Glasgow 13/06/2008 13:11:37
Self-serving and vain, perhaps, but it's important for someone to take a stand against this idiot government so good on him. I'd vote Tory if I lived in England.

Six weeks, without charge; presumably, no access to a lawyer or your family, and no recourse against the police for wrongful arrest.
79

walter,

13/06/2008 13:11:39
#85
He has none due to the fact that the Tories have said if the 42 days does become law they will repeal it if they win.
80

Exiled in Dublin (till independence...),

Dublin 13/06/2008 13:14:20
Back to the point guys. Davis has openly admitted to having 5 mistresses. Would he really resign over a policy issue? Or is there some other reason? Who knows? I don't - but i'd keep my eyes and ears open...
81

Willie,

13/06/2008 13:33:05
Principles and Tories - Don't make me laugh.
What about the Labour MPs that voted against their own government.
The Tories on the up in Scotland - Another comedy.
If they didn't have proportional representation and list MSPs they would have 1 or 2 at the most.
Maybe you've forgotten or didn't know or couldn't care less but not all of us have our heads under the sand.
Davis for all his qualities wasn't selected by his own party and is resurrecting his career- He hopes.
If 42 days saves one life it is worth it!!
I really wish politicians would tackle the things that matter at a reasonable cost not play games.
82

Publius,

London 13/06/2008 13:41:55
#90 Willie

"If 42 days saves one life it is worth it!!"

This is nonsense. No other country in the western world has 42 days detention without charge. Even China has fewer - 39 days.

83

Shave,

Edinburgh 13/06/2008 13:43:41
If the Labour Party decline to oppose David Davis, and Kelvin Mackenzie/Rupert Murdoch stand, I will cheer for a Tory like I've never cheered before.
84

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 13/06/2008 14:12:25
Publius (48): "They say that Brown, being a Scot, has no conception of English freedoms like Magna Carta."

What legal rights did Scots have before 1707? If I recall correctly, the Scottish Crown had far greater powers to impose taxes and imprison subjects than in England.

The Magna Carta(1215) had stated certain rights that people had BUT that these rights were "granted" by the King himself. The Declaration of
Arbroath(1320) stated that these rights and the leadership of their country belonged to the people and not the King. This is one of the reasons that our Kings were called "King of Scots" not King of Scotland.

You will find that it was this document that was used as the direct source for the USA Declaration of Independence. Scottish believed all men were equal but some had to lead. The Magna Carter was more about the rights granted by the king to the Barons rather than the people.

Both however fantastic moves towards improvement for all throughout the world inspired here in these little islands.

85

Iain's,

13/06/2008 14:18:50
It's political suicide but the man is no fool.

I look forward to the fun!
86

,

13/06/2008 14:25:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

Graham Barnes,

Gravesend, Kent 13/06/2008 14:46:16
I agree with no 49, The Honest Lad, entirely. Those opposed to the 42 days keep harping on about 'British' freedom. These people that are being held without charge are people that have no respect for British ideals. Have people forgotten what they are being held for? Have people forgotten what happened when some of them were discovered before they carried out their plans? If the police and security forces feel that there is a need for more time to investigate what is becoming a more complex system of terrorism, then they should be given those powers. Gordon Brown may have lost many friends since he came to power, but I do feel that he was right in this respect, and I think he's shown tremendous courage going ahead with this. When it comes to human rights, surely the rights of us law-abiding citizens should be given preference over the rights of certain factions that have been detained over what is considered a serious threat to national security.
88

Redfive,

13/06/2008 14:47:07
#93 Nice post very intresting info its a shame we dont have any newspaper reporters of your calibre.

I never thought I would say this but well done tory David Davis for standing up for something he believes in and not following the so called party line which never seems to be of benefit to any members of the public.
89

,

13/06/2008 15:05:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

,

13/06/2008 15:06:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

SW,

P&K 13/06/2008 15:13:29
Who got us into the mess of terror in the first place? Bush (CIA created Osama) and Blair. Who controlled the money - Brown. They all have blood on their hands.

Hazel Blears said they trust the common sense of British people. Didn't trust us over the EU did they.

Independence is now an imperative.
92

Fairfax,

13/06/2008 15:20:16
Publius (66): "I don't think his Scottishness has anything to do with his authoritarianism."

Agreed, although I do think it is linked to his belief in statism. Still, I should have been more precise in my question.
93

Fairfax,

13/06/2008 15:27:21
Jock (93): "You will find that it was this document that was used as the direct source for the USA Declaration of Independence. "

I should have been more precise in my question: I'm primarily interested in Scottish rights and representation in the century preceding Union. During this period, my impression is that the Scottish equivalent of the English House of Commons wielded much less power. Further, despite the fine words of the Declaration of Arbroath, I suspect that Scottish legal rights were somewhat less than in England. For example, was there a Scottish Habeas Corpus?

As for being the direct source of the Declaration of Independence, I would view that as a Scotocentric exaggeration. It was certainly one of several inspirations, along with Magna Carta and the Roman Republic (hence the use of terms such as Senate and Capitol), but the writers of the Declaration (especially Jefferson) were much more influenced by Locke and the English Civil War. After all the Thirteen Colonies were English foundations, with legal systems based on English Common Law.
94

Fairfax,

13/06/2008 15:33:00
Willie (90): "If 42 days saves one life it is worth it!!"

Then why not 90 days, or leave it to the state's discretion? The worry, as Publius implies, is that powerful laws tend to be used beyond their initial conception. The best way to avoid an over-powerful state is to limit its powers.
95

Graham Simpson,

Vancouver 13/06/2008 16:07:52
Yes, one man can make a difference! Congratulations David Davis on having the courage of your convictions
96

 Ayrshire Scot™,

13/06/2008 16:45:36
105. Oh please - David Davis voted for the previous Tory Prevention of Terrorism Acts in the late 80s/90s which provided for detention without trial in the north or Ireland for up to 7 days.... whatever his "convictions" they are clearly based geographically with regard to habeas corpus and don't run to total opposition to detention without trial (unless its in England he has the problem with and not the north of Ireland)
97

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 17:28:44
If we are to believe what we're told by the media: if the kidnappers had released Terry Waite on Day 42, we'd all have shrugged and said "Oh, that's all right then. Well done chaps!"

There's no getting around it: for the guy who's in that cell for 42 days without charge, it feels like he is Terry Waite.
98

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 17:39:17
Willie hasn't thought with his head:

"If 42 days reduces the chance of some home grown or otherwise terrorist blowing me or someone I love , or another innocent human being up I'm all for it."

OK, so tonight we arrest you and sling you in the pokey. We don't actually know whether that will prevent innocent people being blown up, but that's the beauty of it, we don't need to know until Day 42. By then though, you've lost your job.

Maybe that will lose you your house and then your wife and kids will leave you. But hey, it could have stopped an innocent person being blown up, so you won't mind the sacrifice eh?
99

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 17:50:56
The Honest Lad hasn't been keeping up:

"I would rather be safe than sorry. If the police and security services say they need extra time to interogate / investigate these nutters"

They don't. Next...

"People who live and abide by the law have nothing to fear"

They do now. They can be jailed for 42 days without anyone saying why this has happened. They're not allowed to tell anyone except a lawyer, and he's then not allowed to tell anyone.

42 days in jail with no clue why, and no certainty that it will stop there, is a long time. Long enough to lose a job. Losing a job is enough to lose a house. Losing a house is enough to lose a family. All that to give a politician the right to jail someone without their normal human rights pertaining. When Zimbabwe jails people without charge we call it "dictatorship". In what way are we so different?

"When they arrest these people"

Oh, it doesn't just apply to those people. The same law now applies to you and I. Remember the old Labour warrior who heckled at the Labour Conference and was removed under the Prevention of Terrorism Act? He could be jailed for 42 days without charge. His family wouldn't be told where he was.

Yeah, we don't have anything to worry about, well, not unless we disagree with this government.

"there is no doubt no smoke without fire and the people they are arresting are no doubt involved in some shape or form."

I daresay your employer would think the same way if you were arrested for heckling. Bye bye job eh?
100

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 17:59:25
The Honest Lad is still missing the point:

"I hope a bomb never harms you or your family because someone had to be released because the security services never had enough time to investigate them properly."

The thing is, to be really really sure someone wasn't a terrorist, they might have to investigate for a long time. It could certainly take more than 42 days to find evidence of terrorism, particularly when the person isn't in fact a terrorist.

By your argument, we could make it 15 years and still risk someone being let out too early. After all, isn't that what's been done at Guantanamo?

Robert Mugabe has had the party chairman of the opposition arrested for treason. Presumably he needs to check whether he's a terrorist. It's a shame he'll miss the election and all that, but hey, they have to make sure he's not a terrorist. Presumably so long as he's let out again within 42 days you'll cheer and raise a pint to Mugabe's good sense of justice?
101

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 18:02:08
"The Magna Carter was more about the rights granted by the king to the Barons rather than the people."

Of the forty rights guaranteed under the Magna Carta, have we lost 38 or 39? I haven't been keeping up, but jail without trial certainly knocks out one more.

102

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 18:05:22
Graham Barnes offers, and apparently without irony:

"These people that are being held without charge are people that have no respect for British ideals."

If I were being held without charge, I'm sure I'd get to wondering about the country's ideals. One would have to be completely retarded to avoid it.
103

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 18:08:27
Graham Barnes scores with what must be a Hall of Famer:

"These people that are being held without charge are people that have no respect for British ideals. Have people forgotten what they are being held for?"

No Graham, they haven't forgotten. They haven't been told at all. Nobody has to tell them, for 42 days.

That's what we on Earth call "the point".
104

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

13/06/2008 18:10:52
Graham Barnes scores a hat trick with:

"surely the rights of us law-abiding citizens should be given preference over the rights of certain factions"

Indeed. I for example would like to retain my right to be jailed only upon lawful charge, no matter what some petty faction of authoritarian politicians imagines is a better idea.
105

Steve Foley,

English Home Counties 13/06/2008 18:32:45
The very worrying point is that what may originally have been brought in as an Anti-Terrorist process - and after 9/11, 7/7 and the ramming of Glasgow Airport doors with a 4*4 with a bomb we are all very sensitive to such threats - could then be conveniently used for other matters. There have for example been cases of Christian activists being arrested for allegedly "Homophobic" utterances and thus "Hate Crimes" merely for citing the Bible prohibition on such matters as in Lev Ch XVIII, V 22, and the case of the old man bundled out of a Labour Party Conference for heckling Jack Straw has also been mentioned.

This is far too much power to put in any Government's or Police Force's hands in peacetime, and as far as I know, whatever we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan and whatever justification we claim for being there, the UK is not actually at war with any other nation at this time, nor under threat of invasion etc.

We are already one of the most monitored nations in the Democratic World with CCTV, the R.I.P. act, and all sorts of official bodies being allowed to pry into our private lives.

Sixty years ago my father and many like him fought a war against a regime which had the 3am boot in the door and people just "disappearing" and we rightly condemned the old USSR for such practices. It would be bitterly ironic if the former Countries of the "Soviet Empire" and even Russia itself had less draconian security laws than Britain, once hailed as the Fountain of Democracy.
106

Gdgy,

dundy 13/06/2008 19:03:54
It is encouraging to see that hte tory sympathisers are as dense and as blind to party spin as teh SNPites and the Labs....this is a piece of theatre by soemone who feels left out in opposition
107

BobD,

13/06/2008 20:31:33
This sorry tale just highlights the Mack Sennett style of British politics. People who were against the bill voted for it because they were bribed/promised concessions. In other words, they weren't voting on the Bill at all.

Edinburgh's Mark Lazarowicz shows what divots we have for politicians : he was against the motion, but decided to vote for it because he was assured it was unlikely to be enacted!

I hope the people who voted for him remember that when the next election comes along.
108

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

13/06/2008 21:40:39
"#48 Publius,London 13/06/2008 09:54:03
Interesting slant this morning from two of my English colleagues. They say that Brown, being a Scot, has no conception of English freedoms like Magna Carta.2

I take you mean the 1332 version which remains on the statute books of England and Wales and not the 1215 version?
109

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

13/06/2008 21:45:22
#68 "As it is he has put the Tories in a potentially very awkward position. The former editor of the Sun, Kelvin McKenzie, feels that the 42 day legislation is supported by the majority of the British people and has stated that he may stand against Davis in the by election. We may therefore have McKenzie standing on a populist platform against a senior Tory."

Could be interesting if he does - the opposition are under the impression that it is just labour that voters detest - in my experience a large number of voters can't stand any of the main political parties. If McKenzie stand on this ticket he could cause an upset - particulalry now there is nowhere for the protest vote to go with the Lib Dems and the BNP not standing.
110

Shamus,

Glasgow 13/06/2008 22:03:59
Davis seemed to me to be a reasonably sensible man for a Tory.There seems to be more to this than meets the eye. Most people know that if the Tories were promoting this bill then Labour would have opposed it. Thats the way they operate. Just have to wait and see what the game is.
111

whitegold,

Shire 13/06/2008 22:29:33
I'm surprised by how negative the Scotsman is being - quoting Labour is hardly enlightening.

I'm glad he's making such a point about 42 days, compulsory ID cards, DNA databases & the like. Good luck to him.
112

scotsdoc,

NANAIMO 13/06/2008 22:55:22

He who laughs last, laughs longest!

Socialism as practised by Labour is a flawed dogma!

Davis comes across as a man with guts and those who sneer are rather reminiscent of HYENAS!
113

Terrier2,

14/06/2008 00:14:59
The only reason Labour aren't standing is that they know they can't win. Brown was scared of a general election, a referendum on the eu treaty, and now this. He is a coward.
114

,

14/06/2008 01:01:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
115

bluehead,

edinburgh 14/06/2008 10:03:59
when honesty and integrity are not criticised by politicians I would be very much surprised.
it has been long since known that they don't know the meaning of the words.
how brown can criticize any one after the vote on the forty two days, which must be the worst humiliation a british prime minister has ever had
having to depend on another party to win a vote was disastrous.David Davis is doing the right thing,because the freedom of the people of this country
has been eroded to a terrible extent, this is no longer the country every one could be proud of,it has been turned into a madhouse,with brown and his mob destroying every thing they can get their hands on.
this goverment has become a disease
116

Ted Voth Jr,

Mad Town Wes' Consin 14/06/2008 21:10:48
Normally I'm anything but a Tory in the right-wing sense, but when someone stands up for the historic rights of Englishmen– and Scots, and citizens of the US that have been so hard-won over the centuries since 1215, I have to stand up and applaud him. Right on, David Davis! At least there are a couple of Englishmen left, over there and over here.

Cousins, you're lettin me down.
117

Scunner,

Ellon 14/06/2008 21:43:45
Davis should not be allowed to stand in the by-election. This is a joke and makes a mockery of the voting system that he is allowed to do this. It is a waste of tax payers money.
118

Frodo the Scot,

ootside lookin in 16/06/2008 04:02:42
#2..Traquir, Alba....For your perusal
'Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a
delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.'
Britain is wrapped up in a Illegitimate campaign to muffle free speech and the free thought process with this Hideous DOO-DOO called "tolerance"........repent before your end of days.
119

bluehead,

edinburgh 18/06/2008 11:23:58
to say the tory party is in disarray.shows how bad the labour party's memory is,that is, if there is any part of there brain that is still in working order.
it's only the other day they were running around,like a pack of juveniles in a sweet-shop,making all the usual mistakes and causing trouble for all and sundry
freedom will only come when brown and his mob are booted out of power,they continue to stink us out

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.