Skip to main content

GREENS ON COURSE TO GIVE DAVIS A SCARE

GREENS ON COURSE TO GIVE DAVIS A SCARE

[This just out from the national party Press Office]

The Greens are heading towards their best by-election result ever,
beating the 6.1% in Vauxhall in 1989, and in the process giving David
Davis and the Tories a scare in the Haltenprice and Howden by-
election. The Greens are the main challenger to Davis, challenging
his claim to be the defender of British civil liberties.

Dr. Derek Wall, who is campaigning in the constituency today, said

"David Davis may find that he will not have this
election completely his own way.

"Many voters find his illiberal stance on 28 days detention without
charge, support for capital punishment and support for Section 28 just
too much to swallow. The Greens' candidate Shan Oakes is the only
option available to those voters.

"There's more to civil liberties than one vote in Parliament; it's not
okay for the government to lock you up for four weeks without even
telling you what you're supposed to have done. It's not okay to deny
you a right to criticise the government within a mile of Parliament.
If a child is being bullied for being gay, it's not okay to order his
school not to have a policy to protect him.

"There is a real interest in Green Party policies in support of our
civil liberties, for the withdrawal of all our troops in Iraq and for
growing a green economy. Voters realise that Shan Oakes is the main
challenger to David Davis and Green Party support is growing rapidly."

Comments

scott redding said…
It's going to be about where the Lib Dem vote in H&H goes. I'm very interested to see what the result is.
9 July 2008 at 22:18
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reasonable manners, in the blogosphere

Dear readers of Rupert's Read; One thing I am pleased about about this blog is that when we have had debates or disagreements here, they have virtually always been good-tempered. Because the norm out there in the blogosphere is often not like that. Take 'Comment is Free', for example, on the Guardian Unlimited site: the level of debate on CIF is pretty awful, frankly, in terms of civility. It is a very unpleasant place to take part in any debate, generally, unless perhaps (as most commenters do) one hides behind the veil of anonymity (which 'ain't allowed' here). And the truth is, in case any fellow commenters reading this don't realise it, that there are many many people who get put off even reading (let alone posting to) CIF because of the volume of plain nasty comments that they risk getting, when they do. I am slightly singling out CIF here, because I believe that this is actually one of the worst places on the blogosphere in terms of this kind of ...
15 comments
Read more

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...
16 comments
Read more