Here are David Davis’s to the last six questions put forward by CoffeeHousers. For Part I click here.
6) Harry:
“How do you square your party’s opposition to 42 days detention, and their support for the EU arrest warrant? Are the two not contradictory? Would a Conservative Government repeal/opt-out of the EU arrest warrant?”
In fact, four years ago, I am quoted by the Sun as saying that the EU arrest warrant scheme creates: ‘a ludicrous concept’, whereby ‘people can be extradited without trial for an act that may not be an offence in this country.’ I have consistently resisted moves to weaken or remove British control over our criminal justice system.
It is difficult to predict what the position will be in two years time, particularly after the Irish no vote, but William Hague has made it very clear that the EU Constitution should be either treated as dead, or the British electorate given a vote on it.
7) Richard Y:
“What are the specific criteria you will measure yourself against to know if this high risk strategy was successful?”
I think it is already proving a success. Within a matter of days, Gordon Brown felt compelled to respond with a speech (albeit a pathetic one) on the balance between security and liberty, the Chairman of the Local Government Association has called for a review of local surveillance powers and the President of ACPO has acknowledged the real concerns I have raised about neighbourhood snoopers. So, straight away, people are starting to think and challenge the conventional wisdom on these issues.
We also need to have a broader, national, debate on the relentless erosion of British liberty. Yesterday I challenged every Cabinet Minister and former Home Secretary to debate the government’s appalling record with me. It is a stark reflection of this government that – whilst it loves to talk tough on terror – it is too terrified to contest the ballot and broadcasters say that Gordon Brown has gagged his Ministers from debating with me. All this from the man who wrote the book on courage.
I have received immense support and endorsements from across the political divides. Beyond the Westminster village, I have been humbled by the overwhelming public response. So this is a debate we can – and will – have, with or without this gutless Prime Minister.
8) Napoleon:
“So how can you resign on this issue, but still defend the death penalty?”
It is a funny kind of politics where, to take a stand on one set of issues, you have to fit identikit stereotypes on a whole range of other ones. There should be room for debate on controversial issues of the day, without being attacked by the political correctness brigade. As a moral position, I think that in exceptional cases – multiple murders, with overwhelming evidence – the death penalty can be justified. But I am certainly not campaigning for it.
9) Jack:
“What will you do after the by-election to continue the fight against the loss of civil liberties?”
One step at a time. But, I will strive to continue this debate, highlight the flaws in the draconian direction of this government and preserve the fundamental freedoms that make this country great.
10) Tory Supporter:
“How can you oppose CCTV and DNA Database? In cases such as Rhys Jones and Tom Ap Reece Price (to name just two, there are many more) murders CCTV was crucial. The DNA database has solved some horrific crimes (Sally Ann Bowmen) and put away truly dangerous people and the police NEED them to fight crime effectively, not to mention the fact they are popular with the public.”
Both CCTV and DNA have their place in our law enforcement efforts. But the current situation is the worst of all worlds – ineffective, intrusive and expensive.
First, CCTV. This government spent half a billion pounds on CCTV – more cameras than any other country, one for every fourteen citizens. There are cases where CCTV has helped, but many where it has failed. After the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes in July 2005, there was no usable footage from any of the CCTV cameras – on the bus, tube or at Stockwell station. Overall, police say that 80% of CCTV footage is unusable, particularly for identifying criminals. That sounds like an enormous waste of taxpayer’s money to me. CCTV is also prone to abuse. In one case, a camera was pointed at a young woman undressing and displayed by operators on a plasma screen at the control centre. We need a much more effective use of CCTV and much stronger controls and sanctions to protect individual privacy.
The DNA database has a role too. But, yet again, the government’s approach manages to be arbitrary, unfair and expensive. We have the largest DNA database in world – including 1million innocent citizens and 100,000 innocent children – but leaving off numerous serious criminals sent to prison. For all the stockpiling of innocent people’s swabs and samples on the database, the amount of crimes detected using DNA has remained consistently low. Less than 0.4% of detected crimes involve DNA matches. So I am just calling for a bit of common sense – which could start by removing the innocent, and adding on all those guilty of serious crimes.
11) Pete Hoskin:
“We recently held a competition on Coffee House to find the best way of keeping your campaign in the media spotlight. The winning entry came from a ‘James’, who proposed that you make an ‘Inconvenient Truth’-style documentary about the erosion of civil liberties. Is this something that your team would consider doing?”
Certainly, if the television companies were interested. I think the public would be shocked by what they found!
Comments