**** For full coverage of British politics click here **** 

To nobody’s great surprise, David Davis swept home at the “liberties” by-election in his Yorkshire seat that he himself had engineered by resigning.

With neither of the other main parties standing, he was left to romp home in a field devoid of any serious rivals.

Davis says his stand was a shot across the bows of a government that he believes is crushing civil liberties by, among other things, trying to get the right to hold terrorist suspects for up to six weeks without charge.

Conservative leader David Cameron has been cool towards his gesture, Gordon Brown has called it a gimmick and several ratepayers in frugal Yorkshire have grumbled that the whole thing was a waste of public money.

What is your view. Bold stand or ego-trip?

A simmering row between family doctors and the government has erupted after Health Minister Ben Bradshaw accused GPs of stifling competition by operating “gentlemen’s agreements” not to poach each others’ patients.

Laurence Buckman, chair of the British Medical Association’s GP Committee, told the BBC the claim was “absolute nonsense”, but then rather undermined his own argument by adding:

“Nor are we going to compete for patients, that is not the way general practice works.”

But that is precisely the way the government wants general practice in England to work in future. It wants to improve patient access to family doctors and believes offering the public a choice of GP surgeries will be a popular and vital element of its plan.

It has already arm-twisted doctors into agreeing to offer extra evening and weekend appointments and is building 150 polyclinics — now referred to as “GP-led health centres” — open early till late, seven days a week, where patients can get seen without needing to register.

“My view is you can compete and collaborate at the same time,” David Colin-Thorne, the government’s national clinical director for patient care, told a media briefing. “Patients need choice to drive up quality and for flexibility.”

Mayur Lakhani, a former chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, told the same briefing that his research into the medical experience of black and minority ethnic people had found they were afraid they would be struck off their surgery’s register if they complained about their GP.

When they did try to change to another practice, they were faced with a long list of questions asking why they wanted to move.

“That shows the big culture change we have to undertake. The receiving practice, instead of welcoming a change, were actually putting barriers up,” said Lakhani.

“I don’t think patients will change GPs and practices every six months, but I think the ability to do that is very important.”

Family doctors will come under greater scrutiny, with their surgery’s performance against quality standards and the views of local patients published on the NHS Choices website.

The government wants to sweep away the days of being stuck with an unsatisfactory GP practice. The question will be whether it can keep pumping in the resources — and keep doctors sufficiently on-side — to make sure there are enough GPs around for patient choice to become a reality.

** For full coverage of UK politics click here **

One of Gordon Brown’s favourite speech writers is leaving Number 10 to return to the Treasury. That gives Brown the perfect opportunity to draft in someone who has the ability to coin the kind of phrases that chime with the electorate and stick in people’s minds.

To date, that is something Brown, whose dismal year in office was underlined on Friday with a humiliating fifth place by-election finish for Labour, has signally failed to do. Sure, Brown wanted to move away from the accusations of endless spin that soured the public mood towards his slick predecessor Tony Blair.

But the mantras Brown has chosen to repeat ad nauseum since he took up the mantle of Prime Minister have failed to stick. Stressing how many people Labour has taken out of poverty in the past decade, or the need to take “long-term decisions” just isn’t working.

People need reassurance over fuel and food prices, over crime and security, but perhaps more than anything they need to be convinced Brown understands — and cares.

Brown — nicknamed the Iron Chancellor during his decade at the Treasury — is right to focus on the long-term. He wants to ensure people can afford to buy homes, that the country slashes its reliance on non-environmentally friendly energy, and that taxpayers have access to good healthcare, education and welfare support.

But with voters feeling the pinch, it’s the short term that’s key, and if Brown wants his messages about the kind of place Britain needs to become longer-term to stick, he might need to think about the kind of sound-bite approach that Blair used so well.

Brown’s tried a more “man of the people” approach but that hasn’t convinced. Voters are not warming to the serious, unsmiling Prime Minister. And if Brown can’t change his manner, then he needs to change the kinds of words he uses.

Of course, he will also need some luck. No amount of “in tune” rhetoric is going to help if people continue to feel he’s not the man to lead them through the economic bad times. But at the moment, his language and demeanour seem to compound voters’ unease. The Iron Chancellor risks becoming the leaden Prime Minister of British history: dull, inert and potentially poisonous.

By common consent, Gordon Brown’s first year is ending up as a shocker for Labour.

It may have started well last June with assured handling of a bomb threat and a swift response to the foot and mouth outbreak last August. Pledges to cut back on two largely unpopular measures: Tony Blair’s plans to open “super casinos “and the extension of drinking hours, also struck a chord with voters.

But since the infamous “bottled election” last Autumn, nothing seems to have gone right for the man who waited so long for the top job. The opinion polls are full of doom and Westminster insiders say talk of finding a successor before the expected 2010 election is rife.

Brown’s supporters say it is unfair to blame him for world trends outside his control — it was the credit crunch that began in the U.S. that caused the Northern Rock collapse and what is the British prime minister supposed to do about sky-high world crude prices that are driving up inflation?

What is your verdict on Brown’s first year?

Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie has scored the first own goal of the Haltemprice & Howden by-election, just hours after saying he was a likely candidate for the Humberside seat.

In off-camera comments broadcast by BBC television he described Hull as “an absolute shocker, it’s beyond shock, actually.”

Asked by the BBC to explain, MacKenzie dismissed his comments as a “joke” and said he had never actually been to the port city, whose western suburbs fall within the constituency’s boundaries

The by-election was triggered by former Conservative Shadow Home Secretary David Davis on Thursday, who will defend his 5,000 majority on the single issue of opposing government plans to extend pre-charge detention for terrorism suspects to 42 days.

With the Liberal Democrats and Labour likely to stay away from the contest, we can look forward to further foot-in-mouth moments from the outspoken MacKenzie — the Guardian has helpfully listed some of his memorable bon mots.

That is, as long as MacKenzie doesn’t announce that talk of his candidature was itself just a joke.

Leader writers applauded the shock value of David Davis’ resignation but were divided over his motives and predicted the potentially shambolic by-election to come would damage the Conservative party.

With the LibDems already having said they will not field a candidate on July 10 and Labour still mulling the options, the papers raised the spectre of Davis campaigning alone against fringe parties like the Monster Raving Loonies and a motley crew of publicity-seekers.

“Yesterday he slashed his own party’s jugular instead of Gordon Brown,” said the Sun. “He will win praise from many voters glad to see a politician standing on a point of principle but in truth his vanity has led to an act of incredible selfishness.”

The Daily Mail also praised his principles but questioned his judgement. “At the very least it deprives the Conservatives of a recognised big hitter ..,” it said. “More worryingly Mr Davis leaves his party leader … exposed to accusations of internal division.”

Right on cue, the Labour-supporting Daily Mirror twisted the knife. Under the headline “Cracks in Cam’s Lot,” it praised Davis for his stand, but said he had thrown the spotlight on party leader David Cameron.

“His failure to show true leadership has left him with a thorn in his side that threatens to divide the Tories,” it crowed. “If Cameron can’t keep a grip on his party in opposition, how would he cope with the pressure of running the country.”

The Independent said Davis’ move “cannot be interpreted as anything other than an act of reckless egotism” which had indeed exposed divisions on the Conservative front bench about 42 days pre-charge detention. Like several other papers, it wondered whether Davis still harboured a grudge against Cameron for having beaten him in the party’s 2005 leadership election.

“The resignation is the first bit of luck Gordon Brown has had in many months,” it concludes.

The Financial Times said the forthcoming by-election “is more likely to be a damp squib than a national rallying point,” and added: “The Tories need fewer gimmicks and more gravitas.”

The Guardian said the Tories are “aghast” at Davis’ stand and echoed many papers’ suspicions that he had been carried away by the emotion of the moment after Wednesday night’s Commons vote in favour of 42 days.

“Everyone at Westminster yesterday thought his decision mad,” it added. “Mr Davis’ job now is to prove all of them wrong.”

The pro-Tory Daily Telegraph said the shock should act as a wake-up call to the Conservatives. “It is no secret at Westminster that the top of the party is run by a small clique of which Mr Davis was not a part,” it says, calling such cabalism unworthy of a government in waiting.

But for the Times, Davis has made a big mistake. Under the headline “From bruiser to Loser”, it said: “David Davis may hold sincere convictions but he has put them and his party at risk for the sake of a disastrous ego trip.”

“Courageous” is how Conservative Leader David Cameron described the decision by his shadow home secretary, David Davis, to quit his parliamentary seat and force a by-election over the issue of pre-charge detention.

Davis says he will contest the seat to take a stand on the erosion of civil liberties caused by the proposal to extend to 42 days the time police can hold terrorism suspects without charge.

The opposition Liberal Democrats — who also oppose the extension — have already said they will not field a candidate, leaving the by-election a clear contest between Davis and a Labour opponent.

But the high risk move has already lost Davis his shadow cabinet post — he has been replaced by shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve — and could backfire if Labour is able to portray it as a split at the top of Cameron’s party.

Is Davis being courageous? Or just foolish?

If the message on the streets up here in northern England is anything to go by, Labour will be sent packing at the next election.

Yes, it was just a by-election. Yes, Labour is suffering from severe mid-term blues. But the swing was a massive 17.6 percent and it wasn’t the Liberal Democrats who gained from Labour’s troubles, as is traditional in by-elections.

From speaking to people on the ground, the Labour vote has collapsed and the Tories are out in force. When pensioners who’ve voted Labour all their lives switch to the Conservatives, it’s time for Labour to worry.

Rising living costs and the perception that Labour has encouraged a benefits culture that is bleeding taxpayers dry were high on voters’ grudge list. Then there was the 10 pence tax ”fiasco” as one called it, or Labour’s “cynical, condescending” campaign against Tory toffs, as another said. 

Overwhelmingly, though, there was a sense that people had just had enough. That Labour had had 11 years and what had they done with it?

On top of that, there was a whiff of victory that pervaded the Conservatives’ campaign and got many apathetic Tories or people who had never voted before out in support for Edward Timpson.

David Cameron just needs to maintain the sense that the Conservatives are on track to win and he could see thousands more floating voters jumping on his bandwagon.

Margarete Cernigliaro, 55, said it was the impression that her vote actually counted that prompted her to go to the polling station on Thursday. She is a self-confessed ”lazy voter” who supports the Conservatives but didn’t think it was worth bothering in the last general election.

She told how her six-year-old grandson had met his six-year-old friend on Thursday on route to the polling station with his family. “Let’s vote for the winners,” said one six-year-old to another, referring to Timpson & co.

Even diehard Labour voters think their party has lost the next election. Jeremy Vernon, a 45-year-old teacher, voted Labour as always on Thursday, but rather reluctantly.

“I think it is a national problem. It’s the Gordon Brown problem,” he said and went on to accuse the government of “cooking the books” over inflation, given the huge rises in petrol and basic food items. Asked if Labour could win the next election, he said: ”I think they’ll lose it, definitely.” 

David Cameron may find that looking like a winner between now and the next election will be enough to turn him into one. 

As much as stunned Labour MPs wander around like Corporal Jones telling each other not to panic after the dreadful result for them in Crewe, many of the newspapers believe Gordon Brown’s days are now numbered.

The Guardian, under the headline “Brown faces meltdown,” says he is facing the gravest crisis of his premiership in the run-up to the Autumn party conference. Like many other newspapers it says the decision to dress Labour activists in top hats and deride the Conservative candidate as a “toff” was a fundamental mistake, albeit one endorsed by Brown.

“Deciding who was responsible for the approach will be a central part of any Labour inquest,” the paper said.

The Daily Express says Brown is now likely to face a “stalking horse” leadership challenge in the Autumn, possibly from a former minister like Charles Clarke or Alan Milburn, with a view to getting rid of him well before the next general election.

Any attempts to unseat Brown will not be forgiven, the Daily Mirror says potential rebels have been told. The paper says Downing Street fears Blairite supporters will be giving interviews this weekend trying to undermine the leader.

Several papers believe Brown will have difficulty coming up with a raft of new policy announcemenets to rejuvenate Labour, having already unveiled many plans in last week’s draft Queen’s speech and moved to defuse the 10p income tax row.

A snap cabinet reshuffle looks unlikely for fear of appearing a panic measure, comments the Independent.

The Daily Mail says some estimates suggest 70 to 90 Labour MPs have given up on Brown altogether with another 120 wavering. But it notes that with the week-long Whitsun recess now having bugun, there is unlikely to be any immediate move to unseat him.

The Mail is among several papers to point to John Major as an example of how difficult it actually is to get rid of a sitting Prime Minister, however unpopular.

“Mr Brown’s fate will ultimately be decided by the Parliamentary Labour Party which meets on Monday week to mull over the result,” it declares.

The Sun calls the result a “Crewe cut” for Brown and says voters punished Labour for soaring household bills and uncontrolled immigration.

The Daily Telegraph likens Labour to the Titanic: “with Gordon Brown at the helm, it is heading staright towards the iceberg that is the next general election,” its political editor Andrew Porter writes, noting that Brown’s best hope — an upturn in the economy — looks increasingly unlikely.

Crewe was a protest “on an epic scale” for the Financial Times

“There will be no shortage of advice for the prime minister, much of it conflicting,” writes Philip Stephens. “He should give definition to his premiership, show purpose for his government; he should swing back onto Blairite reformist ground; or perhaps he should lurch to the left to win back the core vote. He should smile more; or perhaps he should just be himself.”

The paper finds one glimmer of hope for Labour — that those knocking on the doors in Crewe and Nantwich found little evidence of a groundswell for the Conservatives, it says. The voters were more concerned to bash Labour than embrace the Tories.

But Stephens adds: “The comparison that will haunt him this weekend, though, is with the Eastbourne by-election in the autumn of 1990. Margaret Thatcher lost the seat to the Liberal Democrats on a 20 percent swing - and within a month she was gone.”

Jacqui Smith has probably faced some unwelcoming audiences in her time as Home Secretary but it is unlikely she has faced one as tough as the 1,000 angry police officers she encountered on Wednesday.

Smith knew she was in for a grilling when she spoke to delegates at the Police Federation conference, furious that a pay rise, recommended by an independent panel, had not been
honoured in full.

Only the day before, it was announced that police had voted in favour of seeking the right to strike and so she understandably looked apprehensive as officers filed into the
vast conference centre in Bournemouth.

And barely had Jan Berry, the Federation’s outgoing chairman, begun her speech than the audience was putting the boot in.

Berry said she had seen a lot during her five years as chairman, including two Prime Ministers “and counting” and four Home Secretaries. “And counting” came a cry, to laughter from the delegates and a resigned smile from Smith.

It got worse. Berry said she admired Smith’s courage in coming to face the inquisition.

“I am sure when your Private Secretary reminded you of today’s event you felt like reaching for the nearest stab proof vest,” she said, in a mocking reference to recent pictures of Labour’s deputy leader Harriet Harman out in her constituency.

That was followed by a dig at Smith’s confessions she had smoked cannabis when she was a student.

“Your recent crimes have been more for the serious fraud office than the drug squad,” said Berry, drawing appaluse and more laughter from the delighted officers.

But the chairman was still warming up.

She asked how it was the government found 2.7 billion pounds to resolve the row over the abolition of the 10 percent tax band just days before an important by-election but couldn’t find 30 million money to pay for the police pay rise.

And when teachers went on strike recently over pay, Ed Balls, the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, had said it would be irresponsible to override the
settlement agreed by their independent panel, Berry told her.

“Home Secretary, what is it that Mr Balls has but you do not?” she said, to howls of appreciation from delegates.

Smith, smile long gone, now had a face of thunder.