I can’t decide on this “David Davis thing”:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7450627.stm Is it just a stunt? Is he genuinely concerned enough about civil liberties to take the chance (small though it is) of losing his seat? Certainly he sounds sincere when he talks about his concerns about the growth of state power; and Shami Chakrabarti of “Liberty”:http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/ counts him as a friend, it seems.
But as “others have pointed out”:http://ciphergoth.livejournal.com/313052.html he has a bad reputation on “some other rights votes”:http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-7936.html.
Still, there’s no doubt in my mind that he’d be better than “Kelvin Mc-bloody-Kenzie”:… (as backed by Rupert Murdoch, of course).
The most concerning thing, though, is the talk to the effect that the public is in favour of 42-day detention without trial. _This_ member of the public most certainly is not, and I’m sure I’m by no means alone. And honestly: would people who’ve really thought it through be in favour of this kind of thing? I find it hard to believe. What happened, if it’s true, to the great British sense of fair play, of support for the underdog, even of disrespect for authority? Is this another facet of the “grumbling about human rights”:http://devilgate.org/blog/2008/02/15/human-rights-and-human-gains/that I wrote about before?
Maybe we need to re-educate people about what is good and right. But how?
And then Ireland have “voted ‘No’ to the EU treaty”:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7453560.stm. I can’t help but think that this is a bad thing. The EU itself has been a net good for Europe and the world, as I’ve probably said here before. Whether these reforms will really make it better and more democratic, or not, I can’t say: I haven’t studied it.
Thing is, though, I would probably have been in favour of the EU constitution; if only because we could do with one in the UK. Admittedly, I’d want one that got rid of the monarchy and introduced an elected upper chamber in parliament, but one that further enshrined the “European Convention on Human Rights”:http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html would be a good start.
It would be quite difficult to amend it, mind you, since you’d need a Europe-wide referendum.
But I’m havering fancifully here: it was never meant to be that kind of constitution.
What now, then? Who knows, really. I expect they’ll either re-work it slightly and try again, or just apply various components of it without the treaty.