After Alan Howarth and Shaun Woodward, one wonders whether working class voters will ever learn not to vote for turncoat Tories. As an ex-Labour Party member I despair. Is there nobody left who even remembers 1931 as history?

Personally, I welcome some colour and controversy-to a point.”

I have similar views to Shaun in this discussion. I’m not personally very interested in boundaries back in the nineteenth century (sorry Pete). Of course, that’s not say I don’t recognise that some people are interested in those things.

I’m just concerned with the boundary changes for the next election.

As for Quentin Davies… I have no problem with defectors per se, but his defection is an example of the worst type.

There are no apparent, genuine, firmly held values which have lead him to believe that he can no longer serve in a particular party… He appears simply to have thought himself worthy of more than ‘humble’ backbench MP status. Seeing as he wasn’t getting anywhere in his own party he had a very public hissy fit, declared himself enamoured with Brown, derided the party he had been an MP for for 20 years, and turned his back on those in the local association.

Can you really blame Shaun for calling him a ‘pillock’?

I still remember when I heard he had dfected to Labour because I nearly fell off my chair because I’ve always thought of Davies as a staunch Tory. Never in a million years could I ahve imagined he’d join Labour.

Someone on here was suggesting that Sir Stuart Bell might be standing down soon and the party would then parachute Davies into his vacant seat of Middlesborough. Not sure how true this is though.

I reiterate that whether Cameron does or doesn’t block Quentin Davies from getting a peerage isn’t really what this site is supposed to be about. I certainly don’t want the whole site to be taken up with posts saying how wonderful Labour are! That is a ludicrous caricature of what I think. There are all sorts of views represented here, and that’s the way it should be. Whether or not we regard a particular candidate as loathsome, fantastic, or a pillock only matters insofar as it has a bearing on the election. I find that there are a number of contributors here supporting parties other than my own, such as Pete, Joe James B, Andy Stidwell, Tim13 and plenty of others whose contributions are enlightening and of genuine interest. Even some of yours are from time to time, when you avoid personal attacks which are pointless and don’t help to add to our understanding of elections either nationwide or in a particular constituency. I happen to share much of your analysis Pete about Shaun Woodward, Quentin Davies and Alan Howarth, though it is clear that Woodward did start to have severe doubts about some aspects of Tory doctrine. Nevertheless what you say has much merit.

But seriously, I think he is exactly the sort of mid-term defector who the Labour Party will have been glsd to have at the time but they will be eqiuallypleased to see the back of him after the next election. Don’t know whether huge efforts will be made to find him an ultra-safe seat

I dont know. I would not say Shaun Woodward was a pillock. He was certainly a cynical opportunist and strikes me as a pretty unpleasant man all round. Alan Howarth on the other hand, though I would stop short of describing his actions as honourable, appeared to have undergone a genuine political conversion over time. He was not a pillock.

Quentin Davies does though cut a singularly ridiculous figure with both the manner and timing of his defection. Watching him deliver a speech to the Labour party conference about the minimum wage, it was apparent from the smirks on the faces of many of the delegates listening that they thought likewise