How about 42 days. Seems the going rate these days…

I want a combination of the ideals that may not be achievable - free, liberal markets *and* social liberalism combined with just enough of a safety net to look after those who can’t look after themselves while leaving the rest to better their lot.

Shame about the Davis thing - let’s see how that pans out. I hope it at least causes the issue to be discussed more.

So, in summary, “yes” to that Guinness…

Ditto in the US; have a look at what Mr Bush has done to the Constitution, or what Nixon thought he could get away with, whilst JFK or LBJ (for all their faults) forced through civil rights. That’s what does make all of this so confusing; in many ways the old ideas of left & right are starting to disintegrate (or have already).

I guess what’s really tragic is that, as you say, Nick is probably right & whilst I believe Davis has done this for what he believes, it is likely to end up as a farce with the only person standing against him being an ex-editor of The Sun.

Anyway, Guinness?

The flip answer is that they are doing it because they aren’t in power and want to disagree with Labour (avoiding the question for a second of Mr. Davis’ move). I hope it is more than that - because I hope *someone* is standing up for essential liberties for the right reasons.

I am intrigued by your question though - while the Conservatives may have strayed from these, a traditional right-wing attitude would be strong on liberalism in the ‘freedom’ sense and certainly wouldn’t take kindly to a state that locks people up without charge. Small government, not too much central power. These are all right of centre beliefs (coupled with the less nice-sounding “look after yourselves ‘cos we won’t” and “it’s your money” response to taxation which obviously benefits rich people more).

A traditional left-of-centre view-point might more plausibly include the “we know best” argument that the powers-that-be should have the right to take extreme actions and can be trusted not to abuse them. The nicer side of the left in my view is the bigger central organisation designed to look after those who are less capable of looking after themselves.

I think it’s interesting that the two axes of social liberalism and small government / ‘freedom’ liberalism are not independent in politics - I would expect to see all four combinations rather than just two.

I hope that’s even-handed. I don’t think my politics are particularly relevant to this, so I’ll keep ‘em out of it…

On the question of Mr. Davis’ actions, like you, I like the fact someone is making a stand but I tend to agree with your colleague’s viewpoint that it is a somewhat empty gesture as no outcome really changes anything. He was the shadow home secretary - he should be able to wield more power than that, one way or another….