Is Davis heading for the Speaker's chair?

Tim Hedges

Not in a million years. The House would be nervous having such an unpredictable and upfront figure in the job, and Davis would not take it because he would have to shut up on his pet projects

David

I suspect it's just speculation and nothing more, but I have to say he'd be a brilliant choice for the post. There is talk of Ming going for it though, so who knows...

Verity

He'd be aces in the Speaker's role. He respects Parliament as an institution, he's got the mental and emotional wherewithal to be impartial, and he does indeed seem to command respect across the House. And he's not on the fiddle, which might restore some of the respect in which this role used to be held. And would grow in stature as performed in this role.

Patrick, London

..he'd also occasionally make Brown answer the f~@+ing question...

Ray

Better DD as a warrior slaying New Labour dragons than as a figurehead Speaker who would be constrained from letting Brown have it with both barrels.

Cassius

If he wants the job, then excellent. It/he could bring some integrity back into parliament.

ChrisD

This is just another conspiracy theory that feeds into the well aired assumption in Westminster that Davis could not possible have done what he did for long held principles because of his previous record within the Tory machine during the bad years of opposition.
He had a long coveted desire to lead his party. I think that when he gracefully accepted defeat, and shook hands with David Cameron at the moment of his victory that desire died.

He has surprised many, including me, over the last two and half years with the way he has got behind Cameron and worked well in the Shadow Cabinet Team. I have no doubt that he would have been a big player in a Conservative Cabinet in government. I also think that unlike the Blair/Brown years his inclusion and contribution would have been much more solid than the lip-service paid to Cabinet government by the present lot.
So, to throw that kind of influence away to simple sit in the Speaker's chair is laughable. He jumped off the gravy train for a long held principle that has been clearly in evidence in his political make up for years. He did not do it to damage his party, but rather to fight for civil liberties.
The government use the terrorist threat to instil fear into the public for purely political reasons rather than necessity.
We have plenty of laws that if implemented properly will do the job.
But ordinary people are being seduced into accepting the unacceptable in the most cynical way.
Davis is standing up and challenging this, and the *club* doesn't like it, and that includes both politicians and the political lobby.
I like Ben Brogan, but he does display that very typically Westminster snobbery at times.
Rather than just listening to the Westminster bar gossip (a valuable place of insight I know), stand back and look at Davis's record on the issue of civil liberties. Then compare it with what has happened political in that area under this government over the last 3 years.
That, I suspect is where the answer clearly lies, it also says more about many of the MP's who cannot believe that a colleague would willing throw away their career and possible their reputation on a cause other than their own personal career.
But, then, when you look at how the vote for 42 days was won you are left thinking that they care more about their individual careers rather than the issue they voted for....
So, I laugh when I hear any Labour MP who backed this legislation solely to save their leader and their government, then go on to call Davis an opportunist or a stunt man.

42 days detention was the biggest and most cynical political stunt I have seen in a while, but I have not seen the political Lobby come out in the same way enmasse to decry that as they have done with Davis.
Can't say that leaves me respecting them very much just now, or the way they are still scrapping around to find a reason to nail Davis for daring to think out of the political box.

Frank Pulley

If he wins his own seat back after an unnecessary by-election and then resigns again to take up The Speaker's chair, I can imagine that the electors of H & H will burn their ballot papers en masse, regardless of who contests the seat.

Anyway, who would want to occupy the Speaker's Chair after it has been sat in by Gorbals Mick for a few years! I should think that whoever does succeed him will demand at least a fumigation, if not indeed a new chair and carpet beneath it.

Come to think of it, the whole bloody P o W should be dismantled and rebuilt after this rabble of traitors has been deposed and I include HM Opposition in that condemnation, as their incompetence makes them traitors by default.

As for Davis - forget it. He has already committed political hari-kiri and like all suicides it almost always derives from cowardice rather than principle, which he would have us believe.

Verity

Chris D - Your eloquent essay has persuaded me to change my mind. I agree with you. (And you, too, Ray.)

Chris

Who wants to go from a future Home Secretary to Speaker? I fear we are entering silly season.

CS

Frank, you don't have to resign your seat to become Speaker. in fact, you can't be Speaker unless you're an MP.

Chris SE9

DD is much too lazy to be Speaker. And he has become a joke amongst most other MPs on both sides of the House and they are the ones who decide on who the Speaker is.

Ian C

If he wants that job then all the fuss is about nothing. He is too heavy weight for the Tory Party to have him left out of the Home Office or Treasury for any time. As for doing this job it would be a waste.

Perry

So, Boris neutered, DD sits as Mr Speaker, - that’s two trouble makers out of the way.

Who might that leave to wrestle with Noo-Boring-Liars? Surely not the Heir-Presumptive?

Spare us.

Frank Pulley

CS

Speaker remains an MP - thanks for putting me straight on that. But that raises another question: how can an MP represent in Parliament those who voted him in if he has to maintain neutrality from the Speaker's chair? Unconfuse me! I have laboured under the delusion that The Speaker's was a full time job (or racket as the current incumbent has apparently made it).

Frank Pulley

CS
Having wised myself up via:

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/principal/speaker.cfm

I see that the privilege involved is even worse than I thought. He stands unopposed in a General Elections. So three more questions:

(a) What happens if the punters in that constituency fancy a change of MP?

(2) Has that ever happened?

(3) What did that Glasgwegian yob do to deserve a free run?

TGF UKIP

Nah, rubbish. If Dave isn't crapping himself, he should be and so should a few others. DD is a man with a mission. In 2005, he got stitched up not just by Dave and the Tory Left but by their very willing metropolitan media accomplices. Since then he's seen the same crew yank the Tory Party down a very determinedly politically correct, social democrat path - a direction absolutely inimical to his provincial conservatism.

After this by-election DD will be a very big beast with scores to settle on the loose and given his long years of practice in the dark political arts I wouldn't like to be one of those who's crossed him.

Go get 'em DD.

Perry

@ Frank . .. “ (3) What did that Glasgwegian yob do to deserve a free run? “

‘e dun nuthin Frank, - he was nuthin, he is nuthin, and he’ll forever be nuthin.

That’s why he’s there – and in the days of Blair, and now this nincompoop, - he’s a very convenient stooge.

Now, - if DD were there – Fireworks! - but I fancy he (DD) might have other plans!

Perry

@ Frank – meant to add – bring to mind that in maths, we have the LCD – Lowest Common Denominator. Well, he certainly is low, - and common. But I don’t know what he denotes or nominates, - except *!#%

Anan

TGFUKIP: You are right, in order to defeat his only opponent, a Mad Cow, Davis would certainly have to be a big beast.

But what exactly does he achieve by defeating a Looney? What a gloriously pointless election.

Frank Pulley

Well ... Davis has thrown the cat among the pigeons here. But his 'campaign' is not raising much steam in the MSM boiler room. The Tory Party has moved on without him and Labour won't play his game. The Lib Dems will support him, but with friends like that who needs enemies? Miss Great Britain aka Miss Great Tits is using H & H as a platform for her two most prominent points of view and the Monster Raving Looney party is well ... just what it says on the tin.

DD was the Shadow Home Secretary and could have become, within a couple of years, the Home Secretary, which I repeat, is the best job in politics if in the hands of a serious politician and if he is what he says he is, i.e. principled he could have done great things with the office.

How can any of you say that the above scenario indicates that DD has done the right thing? Political suicide in not right if you want to get things done.

Now, to get back to the topic of this thread, if he were to accept the Speaker's job he would add insult to the injury he has already done to the constituents who voted for him. And though he speaks earnestly and has the common touch, his recent actions display a lack of political nous that is sorely needed in Parliament at this very crucial period in our history, Many of the issues he purports to be 'taking a stand against', such as CCTV, ID cards, 'curtailment of liberties' etc., the public are ambivalent about because of the threats and actions of terrorists and ever-increasing violent, serious and petty crime (despite the bullshit statistics). The erosion of privacy is seen, probably by a majority of the punters, as a necessary evil. The bogeyman propaganda has worked. I don't agree with them and think it is important that resist further erosion of our freedoms, but I'm not a politician - and he needs high office to get things done.

DD has almost completely ignored the fact that the 42 days ruling would probably never get through the complete process of enactment, it's a political stunt to turn Gordon Brown into the Incredible Hulk, rather than the Insignificant Husk that he has shrivelled into since he became the boss. And if the 42 days law is passed, the lawyers will never allow it to be used – possible scenarios are mostly fantasies.

Thus Nulab have removed a potential Home Sec. by bluffing. And that same potential Home Sec. will now stand on the sidelines huffing and puffing about principles while the unprincipled fill his boots and do all the things that politicians do and always have done in the name of expediency.
Bad move David! I remember another politician with principles who took the self-destruct route - his name was Enoch Powell.

Reminds me also of the pedestrian who walked on to a pedestrian crossing in front of a fast moving No. 88 bus because he has the right of way. He got squashed too, but he was exercising his rights.

There are some noble causes that are worth dying for - this wasn't one of 'em.