Tory MP Quentin Davies has defected to the Labour Party on the eve of Gordon Brown taking over as prime minister.
In a stinging parting shot at David Cameron, Mr Davies, MP for Grantham and Stamford, accused the Conservative leader of 'standing for nothing' and replacing the Tory mission with a 'PR agenda'.
He wrote: "Under your leadership the Conservative Party appears to me to have ceased collectively to believe in anything, or to stand for anything.
Is this the first of many, there is only so long people will follow a leader that stands for nothing.
Good riddance. We need all the Tory dinosaurs out of the party ASAP. DC is handling the leadership and renewal of the party emminently well - as evidenced by this defector.
Quentin Davies is one of the most intelligent and astute men I have ever met. Not only that but he's principled. Of course not everything he says is always right but he doesn't follow, he leads. I always hoped he'd get a front bench position, I wonder if Brown will now give him one?
As a lifelong Tory and one that supported Cameron, I've been doing a lot of thinking recently. I can't believe I'm saying this but I think that this time around I'll be voting for Labour. I believe Brown deserves a chance and I see nothing from the Conservative party that makes much sense. It's all too 'touchy feely' with no solid policy.
A year ago I thought that Cameron had it wrapped up, that he only had to remain sensible and he'd win. I don't think he will now. I also hope that he doesn't.
I find the Conservatives so vacuous right now that I may even actively campaign against them. As I say, I've always been a Tory, I've worked for Tory MPs in the House and I've supported the party in every election even when others wrote them off but Cameron has taken the party in the wrong direction. I'm skeptical of both his and his shadow cabinet's ability to run the country effectively.
The man is a traitor and an ignorant fool. I'm peeved.
He should at least have the decency to stand down as an MP and let his constituents decide in a by-election whether they still want him. They did not elect him as a Labour MP.
I'm glad his friend schuey has pointed out that Davies no longer had a frontbench position - I think that says it all.
It's very sad that scheuy thinks it's a good idea for the Conservatives to declare all their policies now instead of at the next election when they have all been thought through properly - now that would be insubstantial, not to mention inflexible.
His constituents voted for him, as a representative. With transitional politics as we have today you know very well that being voted in as a conservative means very little in terms of actual policy. In any case, your next point makes that very clear. There is no policy at the moment. Furthermore I think Davies fits in very well with the Labour Government's views.
As for thinking through policies, it was only yesterday that Cameron was calling for an immediate election. Surely he has the policies if he wants an election next month? Or does he need another three weeks to get them right?
This BS argument about having to 'think through' potential policy is ridiculous. How long does the man need? You know very well why the party is holding back, they need to judge public opinion closer to the time of an election to get the best possible result, not because they want to get their policies right.
This is an old political trick and I hope you haven't really fallen for it.
Just finally on your point about him being a traitor, traitor to what? To the traditional cornerstone of Tory policies? If that were the case then Cameron himself would be just as likely to fall into this bracket.
He has to do what he thinks is right, what he feels will benefit his constituents most. If that means taking a stand against the current leadership then so be it.
I really can't believe I'm saying these things about the Conservative party. I never thought I'd see the day. However there comes a point where we can't nor should we, follow a party blindly just because we had some historical affinity with it.
DC would be able to write a manifesto now if he had to - but then he would be accused of inflexibility, and it would enable Labour to steal all his policies. And what if Gordon Brown postpones the next election for a couple of years? Things could be entirely different by then, especially if your new party messes up this country even more.
It's not about writing a manifesto. I presume you've read them in the past? Christ I could write one now. And it would still be applicable to the party for the next 10 years. It's about having a solid position. Not what you're going to do but how you're going to do it. I watched his recent NHS video recently. You can't just say 'get politics out and let the professionals run it'. What does that mean? Those are the questions he's shying away from. That's why he's weak. We know why he's doing what he's doing. It's not about getting it right, it's about looking good. As a PR professional he'll know that such a position can backfire and there comes a point when bland statements need to be clarified and justified. I'm hoping he realises it sooner rather than later. If he waits much longer he won't win the next election. The tide is turning, his honeymoon is over. As Lord Norton once famously wrote, it's time to put up or shut up!
Are you serious? You do not 'write' a budget. Do you think that Brown and Blair sit down, do a few sums and come up with a 'budget'? That is not how it works. LOL :) You certainly don't make financial plans as an opposition, without having access to the data. He couldn't put together a civil service P&L never mind a specific financial budget for 2009.
You do not need specifics to be able to indicate your position or plans. If that were the case you might as well put your head in a hole until you've got to power.
I, like others, want to know what he stands for, what he wants to do and how he plans to do it. Educational policy, foreign policy etc etc. I don't want to hear generic rubbish like "I wish to make the world a better place to live, I believe that people should go to school'. It's nonsense and we all know it.
If you think that you need to create a budget for 2009 to do this then you are just looking for excuses or are delusional. Stand back for a moment. If you were looking at which school to send your kids to, you'd want to hear more from the teacher than 'I will teach your child well'. What does that mean? What's the process? What are the aims? Who will teach him? What issues do you foresee and how will you deal with them? It's simple stuff.
If you've got any ideas for DC, put them in the Conservative Party website in the "policy - have your say" page.
I'd like to carry on this debate at some point, but if you'll excuse me I'm going to cook my tea and visit the gym first... :)
You know very well why the party is holding back, they need to judge public opinion closer to the time of an election to get the best possible result
It's a fallacy to think you can keep everything vague until just before the election and hope to win. The task of the Opposition is to show how you would do things so much better, and you need time for the message(s) to sink in and take effect. The campaign starts now... and it should have started earlier.
There is a fundamental difference of principles between the Socialists (Labour Nu & Old) and Conservatives.
Socialism is State Control, Citizens subservient to and controlled by Government.
Conservatism is about small government, the right of individuals to benefit from effort, freedom of choice.
OK Blair has masqueraded so the electorate see him as Tory, but the result of his policies have been to shift the UK to the left.
We now have a society dependant on benefits.
Penal taxation which removes choice and makes individuals dependant on the state.
Loss of civil rights. The ID card - Etc Etc.
OK State ownership of utilities & business is on the back burner, but that will be a future stage.
The third way is about deception!
If Davies has gone over to the socialists (he could have become a cross bencher) - well he cannot have been a committed Tory, did not hold important the individual & their rights - so good riddance.
I was not surprised to hear today that Quentin Davies had moved to the Labour Party - I heard his rather outraged comment in the debate on the EU Treaty the other day and also his remarks about having a debate on Iraq. He was decidedly for the Labour Party - good riddance! He will undoubtedly reward Brown and Co with the same treachery in due course.
I read this defence of Quentin and Labours principles with disbelief..You guys are sprouting the most awful drivel!!. What does labour stand for that it hasn't sold down the river over the last 10 years in its aim at complete subjugation of our freedom.
It doesn't stand for the rule of law or the supremacy of Parliament or Habeas corpus any more and right now Brown is trying to take away the influence of the Trades union from Labour policy... In other words a Tyrany
Sod Davis and Sod you who are trying to defend him He is just a git with a chip on his shoulder!
The issue at hand is that Davies does not believe that Cameron is the right person for the job. He seems more comfortable with Brown and Labour policies and that his his choice. The problem for Cameron is that there are plenty that think the same. Labour has had some awful policies since Blair first came to power. They have done some terrible things. However, Blair has gone, Brown is an extremely qualified PM with a massive intellect and Cameron looks childlike compared to him. He is more than presentable but the country is sick of presentation, they (I believe) are looking for a strong figure. Brown is one, Cameron is not.
Quentin Davies is just voicing what a lot of others are thinking. It's good for everyone. For those that dislike Cameron it's nice to see an inside expose him for what he is, for those that support him hopefully this move will kick Cameron into action. Cameron needs a kick, he needs to show what he's made of. Davies has given him a perfect opportunity to come out of the PR closet. Let's see if he takes it.
What does labour stand for that it hasn't sold down the river over the last 10 years in its aim at complete subjugation of our freedom.
Jonjii says it all
Brown and Gore are in climate talks. Have you wondered who brought the video to the UK and is paying for it to be shown in all secondary schools in Scotland.
Scottish and Southern energy
Brown is a bully and a control freak as he has shown over the last 10 years.. He is a sulky cloud of huffiness and I for one will give him no chance whatever!!!!
David has been playing Labour at Labour's game... And I am on record as expressing concern over some of the Stuff DC says and does... but
Brown is having a honeymoon... we must keep him on the hop and not let him enjoy that. There is sufficient there to give a lot of discouragement.. the EU, the War, The coming recession etc.
And support DC.... feedback and tell him what you think are vote winners and what you don't like..
Well said jonjii.
I think this strange defection is down to a chip on Davies' shoulder that DC did not give him a shadow cabinet job, and don't tell me this guy's got principles when he timed his betrayal one day before Gordon Brown became Prime Minister to maximise damage on his erstwhile collegues.
Quite frankly, he is welcome to this self-serving scum of a Labour Government. We could do without people like him in the Conservative Party.
Maybe Brown is going to give him a junior ministerial role before he goes into retirement at the next election. Grantham and Stamford won't elect him again. Ever.
Brown is a bully and a control freak as he has shown over the last 10 years.. He is a sulky cloud of huffiness and I for one will give him no chance whatever!!!!
Sounds very much like Thatcher. Being a control freak is possibly a desirable characteristic for both Brown and Cameron considering the quality of their respective cabinets.
Quote:
David has been playing Labour at Labour's game
You're right and that's going to be his downfall.
Quote:
Brown is having a honeymoon... we must keep him on the hop and not let him enjoy that. There is sufficient there to give a lot of discouragement.. the EU, the War, The coming recession etc.
Again, I agree with you. He is having a honeymoon period. And we (both supporters and not) must take him to task, the general voting public knows little about him and so it's time for him to prove himself. That however, says nothing about Cameron and his apparent lack of ability. (Especially as this is prime time for Cameron to dig in and show why he should lead the country. Funny how he's shying away from it)
Quote:
And support DC.... feedback and tell him what you think are vote winners and what you don't like..
The problem I have with that is, I don't believe in 'vote winners'. I want the best person to win, the one who truly believes in their policies. Cameron strikes me as being someone that wants vote winners, that says whatever he thinks is going to be popular and win him the vote. That's not what politics is for me. I've seen enough of that to last me a lifetime. I truly believe that Brown believes what he does because he thinks it's right. I can't say the same for Cameron. (Not that we've heard much of any substance from him which is part of the problem)
Hah! :) No, neither. Just a person that has recently decided to change his political allegiance. I actually can't believe I have. Most of those that know me probably wouldn't believe it. But there you go, times change I suppose.
Having said that, MPs are perfectly entitled to cross the floor and the electorate should take a lot more care about who they vote for. It would help if they could choose from more than one candidate from each party eg in STV.
After watching that rather pathetic display on Newsnight I can only conclude Schuey is a Labour Plant. Far from being intelligent he came across as incoherent and intoxicated... And as for that simpering and rather sickening episode on the sofa with Gordon... horrifying!!!
I hope Quentin enjoys his 30 pieces.. but once a turncoat always so, so he is unlikely to remain in favour for very long.
[not specifically directed at you jonjii]
If that is the case then, surely screaming witch is a childish and a rather old conservative way to deal with him. Does the conservative party still not have anything in their arsenal to have an adult debate and still come out on top while treating the opponent as a fellow intelligent individual.
I see this too often on this website, and to be honest I don't see any different from conservative MPs.
I'm glad that throughout the past two years, most defections have been from LibDem/Labour to Conservative amongst the general public.
All we're talking about here is one man without a shadow ministerial job, who wants a higher-paid job, who's probably going to retire at the next election - with very poor judgment.
Sorry for my Typos guys I have gone back and corrected.
Splatfly you will acknowledge that I for the most part do debate on facts and when things get to Ad hominem I am one of the first to call for reason.
I apologise to anyone I attacked personally except for Quentin Davies who, if he wants an apology, can come and ask for one after convicing me that he is intelligent and has got some principles which he has stuck to through thick and thin... which I doubt.
And I also apologise to Schuey if he can show that he is genuine and not as I strongly suspect a Labour plant brought in to crow.
No MP has the right to cross the floor. He was elected on a party ticket and should have to stand down and be re-elected.
As for giving Gordon Brown a chance. The man has demonstrated with his handling of pensions that he is an unprincipled thief and liar who should not be allowed a position in any reputable government let alone allowed to lead it.
As I said elsewhere "now Blair has spun out of control, we are really in the Brown stuff", and if this Conservative MP is fool enough not to see it I just hope the electorate are not that dumb come the next election. He is still a Conservative until elected on a Labour platform and is cheating his constituents until then.
I saw mention of "recession" in this thread, and I believe you're wrong. While we're not quite at the "boom" stage we are still growing steadily, and I don't think we're quite near a recession and hopefully we won't be. Yes, interest rates have increased but that doesn't necessarily mean we are near recession - it's simply to make sure that inflation doesn't rise too much also. The economy is at a tricky stage and I hope it doesn't go that way...
We gave Cameron a chance when he was made leader of the Conservative party, yes? Now why can we not give Brown the same chance? He wasn't PM before. Yes he had influence but he didn't get to make executive decisions except in the Treasury. Let's see what he does before we condemn him.
As for Davies - it's not treachery changing your political allegiance. I don't like the man but if he decides that Labour and their policies are right for him then good luck to him in his new position. One can only hope that he keeps his mouth in check.
All you are offered is a package of a person representing a party. You take or leave that package. Changing either option is a dishonest switch sell of 50% of that package which would be a criminal offence in any other field than politics.
But ultimately he wasn't PM. Cabinet = executive, yes, but I'm more inclined to blame Blair more than Brown for his reign even if Brown has played a large role.
The PM can do nothing without the approval or at least acquiescence of the cabinet, which included Brown. So Brown deserves no quarter.
"All you are offered is a package of a person representing a party. You take or leave that package. Changing either option is a dishonest switch sell..." Not quite correct, I suspect. You can't change the person but the person can change his label. He continues to be his constituents' representative in Parliament. He represents them all, of course, not just those who supported his label.
People vote for a person no matter how much they think they're voting for a party.
I'm afraid I don't agree. On that logic Davies would have been elected in Grantham and Stamford if he had stood as a Respect, LibDem or Loony Party candidate.
The electorate do vote primarily for the party, even if that's not meant to be how our electoral system works! Quentin Davies's constituents thought they were electing a Tory MP, who would go to the house as their representative and vote with the Conservatives on almost all matters.
I'm sure they're none too pleased about his switch of sides, and I doubt very much if he'll be standing for the same constituency at the next election - as he knows full well that he'll be punted!
Amberlina I see no reason whatever to give Brown a chance..
He has had 10 years at the centre of government, He signed the cheques for gawds sake.. shamelessly impoverished a whole generation of pensioners and wrecked the pension system forever... which affects everybody!!!
I believe that the primary objective of all Tories right now should be to make life for Brown as uncomfortable as possible.
I can't see how the economy has failed under him. Only recently has it gotten into a tricky spot. It's also worth noting that he wasn't the only member in cabinet, you know.
