There have always been hypocrites in parliament and elsewhere but I used to think David Davis had something about him. Now I see he has the same feet of clay as all the others.
In a debate in 2002 on the Regional Assemblies Bill he was highly critical of John Prescott because a vote on the bill was being proposed before details of the assemblies powers and scope had been set out. He said this (HERE column 201):
In a democracy, voters have to know what they are voting for. They need to know what the choice is, to use his own word. For that to happen, the proposition has to come before the vote, but with the Bill, it will be vote first, proposition afterwards. The Bill proposes that referendums should be held without voters knowing the structure or powers of the assemblies for which they are asked to vote. Even the Deputy Prime Minister would have a hard job to convince anyone that that is democratic.
Firstly, the 23rd June vote was against something and not for something. But also, now he is in the executive, he is proposing Mrs May and himself get to define what people voted for. It is amazing that he can defend his position. He went on to say:
Referendums should be held when the electorate are in the best possible position to make a judgement. They should be held when people can view all the arguments for and against and when those arguments have been rigorously tested. In short, referendums should be held when people know exactly what they are getting. So legislation should be debated by Members of Parliament on the Floor of the House, and then put to the electorate for the voters to judge.
No comments:
Post a Comment