Davis to have some sort of civil liberties role

He won't be returning to the Shadow Cabinet anytime soon but David Davis will have a civil liberties oversight role in the party.

He's returning to the Commons next week and will meet David Cameron to discuss what it might entail. Cameron had said earlier that:

"I will talk to him about what the future holds, but I have a very strong shadow cabinet. David is a very strong Conservative and very big figure in our party and there are all sorts of ways of him contributing in the future."

The role may be seen as a way of placating a potentially prickly backbencher, although Davis is apparently keen not to be pigeon-holed as a civil liberties campaigner.

8.30pm: Iain Dale says DD shouldn't and won't accept this role.  Iain's post has probably been written with DD's green light.

Comments

[Westminster Wolf]

Clever from Cameron. He must avoid a bored and therefore restless Davis.

[Peter W]

Hopefully DD spits Cameron in the eye.

[Sally Roberts]

Very much what I suggested on the other thread - and no I am not psychic!!

[Vincent Wall]

This underlines the pointlessness of what Davis did. When he was Shadow Home Secretary he was overseeing civil liberties policy and a whole lot more besides.

[Nicholas J. Rogers]

I like and respect DD, but if he didn't want to be pigeon-holed as a civil liberties campaigner, what was the point of the by-election?

[Andrew Bradley]

What the hell does 'a civil liberties oversight role' mean.

To a peasant like me it seems to be nebulous and meaningless waffle.

[Alan S]

I hope DD says No. That'll get DC worried about his intentions!!!!

[Peter W]

what was the point of the by-election?

Hopefully that he wanted to get out of a wet Shadow Cabinet and at the same time show that he is one of the very few MPs with principles.

[Watervole]

Taking a kind view, perhaps Cameron's somewhat lacklustre statement is meant to keep Labour guessing.

It would be a great error if DD was not back pronto in the shadow cabinet and a prominent figure within government.

Cameron has nothing to be afraid of, but to be certain of that, Davis would have to be given a major brief.

I didn't originally like Davis when I saw his pitch at the last party conference, but his actions have convinced me that this man is a serious player and of the quality that this country desperately needs. He is potentially a latter day Churchill and though Cameron is extremely smart, he lacks one thing that DD has in trumps - the ability to lead people over the barricades.

I am not advocating that Cameron is not the right man to lead the party, but, Davis could potentially bring something extra to the conservative thrust. He has the common touch and as a party, we do need that to avoid accusations of "toffism" and to ensure appeal to the wider electorate.

It would be very good if this were harnessed and I think, a serious mistake, if it were not.

[Richard Calhoun]

Davis let down the 'team' by resigning and he does not deserve to re-enter the shadow cabinet at this time.

The whole project has been a waste of time and was a massive error of judgment by Davis.

Cameron needs loyal team members who are not likely to AWOL

[Watervole]

Richard,

I don't think there is any justification for saying that DD "let down the team " or that he is not loyal.

If that had been the case, Cameron and others would not have been out on the stump for him.

Also a Sky News poll this morning was massively in favour of DDs actions.

[Peter W]

Both Davies and Cameron agree publicly that there are no disagreements between them, so Cameron had to support him actively. However, I have read that Davies did not inform Cameron before resigning. If that is true, there are more to this story than we are told. As I have said in another thread: Davies might have insisted on giving a pledge and been refused.

In any case, Davies would have known that he would be replaced immediately in the Shadow Cabinet.

[Dale]

"I have read that Davies did not inform Cameron before resigning."

If that is true then both Davids have been lying though their teeth in interviews when they both say David Cameron tried to disaude him, saying that it was 'very high risk' but that it was David Davis' decision.

[Peter W]

Dale, I googled the subject now and found for example this: He only informed Mr Cameron after Wednesday’s division on the 42-day power

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4124674.ece

[Jack Stone]

The only person that David Davis is loyal to is himself. The notion that he even knows the meaning of the word is laughable!

[Dale]

"The only person that David Davis is loyal to is himself. The notion that he even knows the meaning of the word is laughable!"

Oh Jack, you can surely do better than that, can't you?

I think you may be loosing your touch.

[Iain]

Davis for Shadow Chancellor?

[Dale]

losing*

[HF]

Story came from Rosa Prince of the Labourgraph.

More cr*p from that paper.

[DougR]

He would make a good Shadow minister for the paranoid

[John Scott]

David Davis is the only MP to have a mandate on 42 days specifically. I think the last few weeks shows Cameron's failure to manage a difficult person and I hope he is learning.

David's resignation freed Cameron - but he seems to have chosen not to take this opportunity, by appointing Dominic Grieve. David Davis should be reappointed to the Shadow Cabinet in a reshuffled team which dismisses: May, Ainsworth, Spelman, McLoughlin and Duncan.

We need to be ready for Government, and clearly Davis has a contribution to make to the top team. No opportunity should be lost to bring him back into the fold.

[Goldie]

DD is going to turn down the book.
He is going to try to re-ignite the grammar schools row.
He is going to re-ignite the European issue.
Contrary to his statements, he is thus doing everything he can to undermine Cameron --even though I personally agree with DD on 2 out his 3 big issues.
This is a test of leadership for DC. Thus far he's failed it. The gloves need to come off. He needs to be ruthless. DD needs to be told to either step in line or be kicked out of the party.

[Peter W]

DD needs to be told to either step in line or be kicked out of the party.

What you mean to say is: "There is no room for someone with principles in the Conservative party", except that if you used the P-word, many here probably wouldn't understand what it meant.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Goldie even by your standards the above post is bizarre. You have no evidence whatsoever for any of these assertions.

[Goldie]

@Malcolm Dunn. Oh really? Is today's
Daily Telegraph good enough 'evidence' for you:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2287578/Haltemprice-by-election-David-Davis-to-turn-down-David-Cameron-civil-liberties-job-offer.html
Relevant quotes:

'As well as continuing his civil liberties campaign, he plans a book on social mobility which will almost certainly reignite the row over grammar schools.
..
After a backlash from traditionalists including Mr Davis, [Cameron] was forced to agree that new grammars could be established in areas which already had selection at 11 plus.

Ominously for Mr Cameron, the arch Eurosceptic also intends to focus on the issue of Britain's role within the European Union, opening a potential can of worms for his leader.'

I await your apologies.

DD has proven to be disloyal. Cameron needs to show some steel and neutralize him.

[Malcolm Dunn]

No the Telegraph would not be good enough for anobody. Neither they nor you have any evidence whatsoever that David Davis has been disloyal to Cameron.
I suspect Goldie that you are as wrong about this as your predictions over the local election results have been or the kind of Conservative Party that would emerge under David Cameron's leadership.
Time will tell of cours but no apolgies are necessary.

[Goldie]

If you can't even understand that the very act of his resignation is an act of utter disloyalty, there is nothing I can say.

[Malcolm Dunn]

I suppose that's why Cameron spent the day in H & H campaigning for Davis, I suppose that's why both men have made statements in support of each other and most importantly why Cameron replaced Davis with a man who shares exactly the same views on 42 days.
I fear 'Goldie,' that yet again you've no idea what you're talking about.

[Jack Stone`]

Goldie you are totally right in everything you say. The man knows that should David Cameron win the next election, as seems likely, his chances of leading the party are gone forever and his doing his best to try and provoke problems that will make the party look like its split again.
The man is a self server that is all and David Cameron should let him stew on the backbenches where he belongs.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Blimey! Goldie and Jack Stone in alliance!

[David Lindsay]

Congratulations to David Davis on beating David Cameron’s Tories, against whom he was really standing. Although he faced many frivolous candidates, he also faced at least one serious supporter of 42-day detention and other attacks on liberty. So much for the popularity of these things: the people have now spoken on that one.

The Tories still show every sign of not really believing that they are going to win the next General Election. Their musings on English devolution, for example, seem to presuppose that they will win the majority of English seats but that Labour will win overall, or at least be the largest party in a hung Parliament.

But if they really do think that they are going to win, then might they not consider giving the position of Prime Minister, not to David Cameron, but instead to a Tory?

If so (and if not why not?), then step forward, David Davis.