David Davis: I return to the Commons with a mandate to fight Gordon Brown's vision of Big Brother Britain

David Davis won his by-election with a majority of 15,355 and on a turnout of 34%. These two quotes from his speech at the by-election count were recorded by The Telegraph:

David Davis claims he has transformed public opinion during the period of his campaign: "Today the people of Haltemprice and Howden have delivered a stunning - a stunning - message to the Government, and our campaign has reverberated across the country. Four weeks ago as Gordon Brown stooped into the gutter to rig the vote on 42 days, ministers crowed that 69% of people voted 42 days. Today just 36 per cent supported it.  Four weeks ago the Government touted public support for a range of other draconian measures.  Today 71 per cent support my stand against the attacks on British liberty."

On his return to the Commons: "I do so with a clear mandate, to fight Gordon Brown's vision of Big Brother Britain tooth and nail, to stop 42 days in its tracks, to prevent the disaster of ID cards before it happens, to protect our personal privacy from being ransacked by the ever-intrusive state.  But most of all for the thousands upon thousands that have written to me, supported me, and voted for me, I return to fight for those fundamental freedoms that define our way of life - freedoms that millions died defending, freedoms that make Britain great."

BBC video of a post-count interview with David Davis in which he claims the turnout was "spectacular".

9am: David Cameron congratulates Mr Davis on his "brave" stand and says that public support for 42 days is "draining away".

9.30am: PoliticsHome has transcribed highlights of DD's Today programme interview.

11.15am: "Conservative heavyweight David Davis is 10/1 for a return to the shadow cabinet before the end of the year, following his Haltemprice and Howden by-election victory," says Ladbrokes.

Noon: Video of DD's victory speech

Comments

[Sally Roberts]

No surprises there then!

My prediction - DD will return to the cabinet in the next reshuffle - but not as Shadow Home Sec. I think DC may well put him in the position last held by Patrick Mercer where he'd actually be very good.

[Sammy Finn]

Guardian headline: DAVIS SEES OF LOONIES IN BY-ELECTION

Says it all.

[Rod Sellers]

Well done David Davis. He won the argument . Labour have lost all moral authority. The Lib Dems supported Davis's stand - so stood back. All the other ragbag candidates at least had something to say. Gordon Brown and Labour had nothing to say and nothing they could defend - In the name of God! They should Go !

[David Graves-Moore]

Congratulations to David Davis on his re-election to the Commons. His campaign has kept the issue of the erosion of civil liberties in the headlines. The size of his vote is a tribute to a remarkable man who has that old fashioned quality of actually believing in something other than his own advancement.
It is sad that Sky News tried to belittle Davis’ achievement by using such phrases as “... but on a reduced majority”. Surely he should be congratulated on achieving such a large vote (over 17,000) in a bye election where the government dare not show its face. By contrast the BBC's report seemed very fair (for a change).
Politics needs more people like David Davis. Democracy needs fairer reporting.

David Graves-Moore

[Graham D'Amiral]

Congratulations to David Davis on his victory, I look forward to him returning to parliament and providing a powerful voice to the great cause of resisting Gordon Brown's pans to further erode our civil liberties.

[Mark Hudson]

A total waste of public money.

[David Belchamber]

Congratulations to David Davis who took a great personal risk for the sake of a vital principle.

The coalition of support that he attracted was one of the most satisfying things about his campaign and should prove to the conservatives that to do what you think is morally right can also be a vote winner.

Brown won the vote on 42 days but has lost the debate. Over now to the HoL.

[Marathon runner]

David Davis is wrong to claim he has changed public opinion already.
As ConHome argued yesterday he needs to stick at this like IDS sticked at his social inclusion message.
I hope he does!

[David Cooper]

A small but interesting take on the result from Iain Dale: "The candidate Labour was tacitly backing, Jill Saward, came sixth with a miserable 492 votes, 29 fewer than Miss Great Britain." And almost 15,000 less than DD.

Now for stage two following DD's return to the Commons. It would not be unreasonable to summarise this as: "Labour are the party of authoritarianism. We are the party of freedom." Here's hoping this message is proclaimed far and wide.

[Sammy Finn]

Thoughts from The Spectator on WHEN David Davies will return:

It is clear that Cameron will not reshuffle straight away to return Davis to his team, he doesn’t need to and Davis’s rash actions have made lots of those around the party leader even more wary of him. Davis himself is not agitating for an immediate return; on The Today Programme this morning he once more effusively praised his successor Dominic Grieve. However, if Cameron loses a shadow cabinet member to a scandal and has to reshuffle then all attention will be on whether or not Cameron brings back Davis.

[RichardJ]

"Today the people of Haltemprice and Howden have delivered a stunning - a stunning - message to the Government"

Yes - that in a safe Tory seat with no Labour or Lib Dem opposition, the Tory candidate will win overwhelmingly.

If the turnout was about 50% this might have been something to shout about. But 34% is hardly a great message - it's just the Tory loyalists turning out to put Davis back in.

I know this sounds horribly cynical but as someone who backs Davis on this issue, I found that statement profoundly silly.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

Wow! The "brave" Davis wins. Dog bites man.
He had better hope that no bombs go off in the near future.
Criminals will be pleased to know that Davis has little regard for DNA and strategically placed CCTV.
Turkeys vote for Christmas.

[Jennifer Wells]

The one word that comes to mind is vanity.

[Watervole]

Congratulations to David Davis. Even Boulton stated before the election that no one was expecting the vote to hold up so the 70% was an excellent result and a very clear message.

No to the surveillance state!

Labour should have fielded a candidate - cowards.

Oglaza need shooting - his reporting was poor on Sky and very biased. The government didn't win the 42 day vote, it BOUGHT it!!

I hope David Davis is back in the shadow cabinet pronto - he should be deputy PM. Someone who wasn't afraid to stake his whole political career and the certainty of cabinet office at the next General Election deserves our total respect.

[Anthony Barnett]

I make the point in OurKingdom that DD had a higher proportion of his electorate voting for him, 27%, than Labour has of the electorate voting for it in 2005, 22%.
I also, er, criticise the BBC's coverage
http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog/ourkingdom-theme/anthony-barnett/2008/07/11/bbc-total-shambles-as-davis-outvotes-the-government

[David_McD]

The problem is that our traditional liberties and our very democracy itself are very much more at risk from the ever expanding EU Superstate than from the dying days of the discredited Labour Government which can no longer get much of its legislation through the House of Lords.

David Davis, who as a whip, helped to force through the Maastricht Treaty, is effectively silent on this issue, as is his leader.

[gingeral]

Well done DD, I think his turnout was high enough to defy the critics. Should he return to the Shadow Cabinet? ASAP, please. DC may think he has a strong Shadow Cabinet but there are a lot of minnows in there, especially when one considers the talent being left out in the cold (Clarke, Rifkind, Trimble, IDS, Redwood etc). And remind me, who came top of the Shadow Cabinet performance rankings on this site most of the time, and second the rest? David Davis. William Hague is the only other person in the Shadow Cabinet with anywhere near the talent and gravitas that DD possesses. He has completely restored my faith in politics, and if that has cost me 0.5p then that's a price I'm willing to pay! Waste of money? Don't make me laugh, some things are important enough to go out on a limb on. The Magna Carta is one of them.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Congratulations to David Davis. He has won the argument hands down. I very much hope that he can play a full and CONSTRUCTIVE role in the future Conservative government.

[Watchdog]

I think David Davis should go and join all the others at Speakers Corner.

[Mark Fulford]

make the point in OurKingdom that DD had a higher proportion of his electorate voting for him...

Not a great surprise considering Labour supporters didn't have anyone to turn out for.

[Mark Fulford]

Sorry for italics.

[John Ward]

Good result. This was an important moment in this country's history, and will surely be recorded as such.

It was necessary to happen (but should never have become necessary -- blame NuLabour for that, no-one else!) but we are fortunate in having someone who could and did take the brave stand that was the only effective way left to make a real impact.

Oh, and as usual, the Labour trolls here merely demonstrate that they haven't a clue about this issue and have nothing in common with the real, everyday folk of this country. Perhaps instead of wasting their time posting garbage here, they could achieve something by going and learning about the Real World out there...

[Londoner]

I am very disappointed that we have yet to have a comment from our Eng Nat friends on here about the historic result of them having coming third in a by election: with infinitely more votes that 67% of the three main parties. Projecting the result nationally, the Leader of the Opposition position is on a knife edge between them and the Greens.

It is actually rather encouraging that the BNP did so badly.

Which was the candidate who was trying to get the least votes ever in a by-election and was he one of the two who got only 8 (see BBC website for full result)? That tally means that at least 2 of the signatories to their nomination forms did not vote for them!

A legal point: with more than 20 candidates it would have been possible for the winning candidate to have only polled 4.9%. If that had happened, is it legally possible for the winning candidate to lose their deposit?

[Change comes from within]

Fraser Nelson described David Davis as a modern day Eddie the eagle at the start of his campaign. A perfect metaphor. We all loved Eddie for his courage and pluck but at the end of the day he was never good enough to be on the main rostrum for the medals.

[Editor]

Londoner: You may enjoy John Redwood's broadside at the English Democrats' expense.

[Jonathan]

Congratulations to David Davis

CCHQ just doesn't get it, does it.
Going through the motions of democracy is not democracy. The public despises Westminster and its ineffectual chicanery. DD's stand has resonated with ordinary voters in ways which CCHQ's synthetic postures never have.

@Mark Hudson
It may well have been a waste of public money but given the rubbish it is otherwise wasted on the defence of public liberty isn't a bad cause.
Or are you suggesting that democracy and the parliamentary system are themselves generically a waste of money. Couldn't disagree really - just as long as they are replaced by rule by me and not by you.

[M Dowding]

Fabulous bit of real and honest politics. It really was worth it. 17000+ voters agreed.

[Gezmond007]

What a pathetic waste of public money! So David Davies has a mandate to challenge the government on Big Brother security matters. Handing Labour lots of material to hammer the party on being weak on security and crime.

I can see the Labour posters now , National DNA database caught x amount of Criminals , rapists , and murderer's , Some Tories want it scrapped, Vote Labour the Tories are soft on crime.

And the same on CCTV which has also helped to bring down crime by up to 30 % in our major cities. And the majority of the public still back Labour on the 42 days , Tories are soft on terrorism.

I can see this and I think David Cameron and his PR Gurus can as well , which is why Dave didn't want Davies to go ahead with this charade ! Why can't all those on this site see past this daft self indulgent waste of time by the former Shadow Home Sec.

[Sally Roberts]

He made a good victory speech! Big improvement in his public speaking skills which used to be, frankly, rather ropey!

[Norm Brainer]

What a pathetic waste of public money!

just have to hope GB doesn't think like that when the next GE is due!

Congratulations DD!

[Gezmond007]

Norm ,Sally congratulations for what ? Dropping the party in the Mire! I despair with you people have you no vision !!!

Just wait until the General Election, I am sorry to say but you'll see .

[Eleanor McHugh]

Probably Gezmond007 because we know enough of this country's history to realise what it will be like under the joyless, puritanical, repressive surveillance state that we have been blindly walking marching towards for a good fifteen years.

As for the National DNA Database, if this government cared a jot for the freedom of the individual the database would store DNA samples collected at crime scenes and that would be the limit of it. After all, that's the evidence that matters.

Instead they presume that we are all potential rapists and murderers and use any trumped-up excuse imaginable to store our DNA permanently on file. Such presumption of guilt has no place in the English legal system.

[Mark Hudson]

It was a waste of public money, pure and simple. The dynamics of the debate have not remotely been changed: the legislation is following its parliamentary course exactly as if no by-election had taken place. Moreover, and regrettably, the subject is no more discussed down the Dog and Duck by the average punter than it was before.

The turnout was way under even half and he got fewer votes than he did when Michael Howard was the Party Leader at the General Election in 2005.

I am sorry, but what the hell was the bloody point of it?

[Jack Stone]

The terrorists friend returns!!

[Saltmaker]

I am sorry, but what the hell was the bloody point of it?

David Davis got from the front bench to the back bench which, considering there was no other possible result, I suspect is exactly what he wanted. The only thing clever was that he managed to make the reason Labour rather than David Cameron.

[Sally Roberts]

"Norm ,Sally congratulations for what ?"

Gezmond007 - read my posts again...I didn't use the word "congratulations"! In my first post I noted that it was no surprise and that DD might be good in the Patrick Mercer job if DC saw fit to put him back into the shadow cabinet - and in my second post I remarked that DD's public speaking skills had improved - which they have!
I remember him coming to an Association Dinner some while ago where his best effort was to trot out a joke so old it was growing mould on it and of such a nature as to upset some of the women present! Hopefully this sort of thing is now behind him.

[Robert]

No Jack, you continue to maintain your record of being 100% wrong on absolutely everything you comment on - a perfect negative indicator!

[Londoner]

Editor - thanks for the link to John Redwood, but I think his was a rather stupid comment really.

Although I was adopting a teasing tone towards the Eng Dems - much better I suggest than JR's rather angry one - JR is wrong that they lost their deposit, they actually saved it. The beat the BNP soundly and I'd much rather the disaffected voted for the Eng Dems rather than them. Imagine the field day if the Eng Dems did not exist and many of their votes had gone to the BNP putting them second and saving their deposit?

They also came quite near to beating the Greens, whom are one might assume would be a natural repositary for Lib Dem and Labour people who could not bring themselves to vote for a Tory but still wanted to vote.

So, although I made my comment jokingly, I have now ended up praising the Eng Dem's myself (even if they have rather a long way to go)!!

[RichardJ]

"No Jack, you continue to maintain your record of being 100% wrong on absolutely everything you comment on - a perfect negative indicator!"

That is because he is a UKIP-supporting troll who has been doing this for years.

[Londoner]

"The terrorists friend returns!!"

I actually find this comment from Mr Stone rather offensive. DD's policy is party policy so presumably he thinks our party are the terrorists' friends. Let's lock up anyone who the police think might have once sent an email to a suspected terrorist for, say, 5 years without telling them why! That's the way to increase support for the forces of law-and-order and the benefits of western ideology: what ho!

[Londoner]

Well if JS is UKIP - interesting that they put up no candidate. Following the lead of the Labour Party I presume.

[Goldie]

Well, Davis gets what he deserves: to look slightly ridiculous.

[Westminster Wolf]

What will happen next?

My 3 stage prediction:

David Davis will get bored unless he's given a big job.

If he gets bored he'll look for excitement.

He'll find excitement in disloyalty.

[Sally Roberts]

Westminster Wolf I fear you could be right...unless he does the sensible thing of "taking up" the cause of liberty and doing some useful and valuable work rather as IDS does in the field of Social Justice. It could be done and as my grandmother used to say "The Devil Finds Work for Idle Hands".

[David Belchamber]

We must remember that Gordon Brown - partly because of DD's stand and partly because of the HoL debate on the matter - has not heard the end of the 42 day debate.

I was glad to read Andrew Gimson comment:

"Lord Falconer.... said he opposed 42 days 'root and branch', since it was quite possible to charge a detainee as long as there was 'reasonable suspicion', even if not all the evidence had been collected".

If Brown's Bill does become law, I hope the conservatives will immediately promise to repeal it and replace it by a much shorter period of detention 'without charge' on suspicion of terrorism (say 14 days) and then allow the authorities as long as they reasonably need to put together a case.

I have no trouble with that.

[Jack Stone`]

The party is wrong on this subject and could still pay a heavy price for it. The liberty to go about your business without the fear of being blown to bits is far more important than the rights of those suspected of being terrorists.
The next time there is a bomb outrage and there is bound to be try defending this then!

[Ken Stevens]

Londoner
"..UKIP - interesting that they put up no candidate..."

The English Democrat candidate was good value for money, i.e. an underlying Tory with EUscepticism and concern for England. Three for price of one!

From ED website:
"..had been a Conservative voter .. became active in the Referendum Party. ..UKIP Parliamentary candidate in ..2001, ..became increasingly disappointed by UKIP’s .. failure to capitalize on their momentum. ..now thinks ..UKIP .. 'dead but not yet buried', and that it is also insufficiently concerned about England, so she joined the English Democrats.."

[Norm Brainer]

The next time there is a bomb outrage and there is bound to be try defending this then!

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety

[Peter W]

Congratulations to DD!

However, one does get the impression that it was a waste of effort and money as Labour didn't bite and as most people, while agreeing with DD on this subject, still don't give a damn.

However, DD proved his point and as saltmaker @ 13:32 rightly said, he got out of a wet shadow cabinet in a nice way. It will be interesting to see his next move.

My best guess is that DD really resigned because Cameron didn't allow him to pledge that the 42 days would be changed to 28 days.

[Vincent Wall]

No mention of DD on the Six'o'clock News headlines. He's already a non-story.