Phil: We should have a referendum on capital punishment where all those who vote Yes for the sentence to be used can be subject to its use, but those who vote No can’t be. Would be interesting to see how that went down…

I’m quite concerned about this government’s rhetoric on civil liberties (& why we don’t need them). On accommodating people’s ‘worries’ – why? What do they think is going to happen if they don’t pander to the worst and most reactionary instincts of the public? I can’t help thinking what’s really going on is that they’re knowingly stoking up the terrorist panic (along with the gun panic, the immigrant panic and the hoodie panic) because it gives them endless opportunities to buy a bit of popularity by cracking down on some minority or other. The language of ‘balance’ is particularly suspect – what it usually means, if you unpack it, is giving us a bit more security by giving them a bit less liberty.

Perhaps the Davis campaign will be the point where people start to realise that – as somebody said on Question Time last night – approving of 42-day detention logically means approving of it being done to you, because once it’s in law it could be done to anyone. And perhaps not.