Maybe I’m just “emotional” because it’s 3.20am and I should be fast asleep. But David Davis’s “victory” - he’s just won 17,113 votes, about 70 per cent - already has a hollow ring. It’s not his fault, poor chap. Where were the other major parties?

He must have felt like a prize fighter, psyched up and oiled up, entering the boxing ring only to discover toddlers and puppies all around him.

True, the Greens did okay, getting 1,758 votes. But most of the 26 candidates were, ahem, “loveable eccentrics” rather than serious politicians.

My view is that if Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats hadn’t stepped aside then Labour probably would have put someone up.  And we could have had a proper debate, a proper by-election and - believe it or not - an element of surprise.

At least the turnout, at 35 per cent, is enough for Davis to retain his pride.

Thursday’s by-election in Haltemprice and Howden was starting to look like a bizarre circus.

No disrespect to the electoral candidates such as “Mad Cow-Girl” (pictured below), David Laurence Bishop (Church of the Militant Elvis party) and Tess Culnane (National Front).

But David Davis’s one-man campaign to promote civil liberties received a shot in the arm today from the stirring debate in the House of Lords.

Former experts who know what they’re talking about lined up to criticise 42 days.

* Lady Manningham-Buller, former head of MI5 (”I don’t see, on a principled basis, as well as a practical one, that these proposals are in any way workable.”)

* Former attorney general Lord Goldsmith (it risks ”giving away the very freedoms that terrorists are trying to take from us”.)

* Former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer (”I’m absolutely clear that there’s no advantage for fighting terrorism that will be obtained from extending detentions to 42 days.”)

The timing could not be better for Davis, who is campaigning against the extension of pre-terror detention as well as the wider “Big Brother” state - CCTV, DNA database etc.

The only candidate who might put a dent in his bandwaggon is Jill Saward, victim of the notorious “Ealing Vicarage” rape in 1986.

Her line may also strike a chord with voters: “Too often we hear politicians and criminal justice experts talk about the rights of the accused, the rights of prisoners, and the rights of ex-offenders - even the rights of suspected terrorists.”

Speaking to me on the phone this morning Ms Saward argued that Davis’s views were “a very ideological view of how Britain used to be” from a time when neighbourhoods were more close-knit. Today, people relied more on the state to protect them, she said.

While claiming to want to be an MP, she also admitted that just getting a large number of votes - and raising the concerns of crime victims - would be satisfying.

Remember, the Lib Dems and Labour aren’t standing.

It’s not enough for Davis to maintain his vote; for him to claim any success here he needs to raise it, substantially.

My favourite line from today’s report - “Conduct of Sir Nicholas and Lady Winterton” - lies in the appendices. It is a letter to the standards commissioner from Lady W on April 28, 2008:

….”My husband and I have already commenced looking for an alternative property with similar facilities in the Westminster area. As I am currently chairing the Local Transport Bill Public Bill Committee and Nicholas is the lead Chairman on the Finance Bill Public Bill Committee and, in addition, we shall be attending the inauguration of the new Taiwanese President in Taipei in May, I am sure you can appreciate the limits on our time….”

( Sir Nicholas and Ann Winterton were found to have broken expenses rules by claiming rent on a flat they already owned. The Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges accepted that the breach regarding the £700,000 London property was accidental. But they ordered the couple to cease their unusual arrangement from September onwards. The Wintertons claimed more than £120,000 in Commons expenses for their second home, six years after they paid off their mortgage. They did this by moving the building into a family trust, set up for their two children. This allowed them to claim more than £21,600 a year in “rent” on the building and also avoid inheritance tax in the event of their death. )

Yesterday was a day of sheer drama as the terror bill was passed in the Commons by the thinnest of margins after genuinely heartfelt debate over balancing security against human rights.

And now we’ve been treated to an even more entertaining event - this morning’s resignation by David Davis, shadow home affairs secretary, ove the same issue; the defence of Habeas Corpus etc. He has already been replaced by Dominic Grieve; not temporarily.

Davis hopes that in the imminent by-election for his seat he can campaign on the single issue of human rights, turning it into a mini-referendum. Although David Cameron has known since last night, he doesn’t seem very enthused by the gesture, describing it as a “private” decision.

Will the move have the intended effect? If Davis didn’t have a rock-solid majority it would be a more brave and selfless manoeuvre.

As it is, he will still win - not least because the Lib Dems and UKIP* will not put up a candidate (Labour is undecided for now). But how will anyone know whether this is because the good people of Haltemprice and Howden, in North Yorkshire, are committed to the ancient liberties of the United Kingdom?

He may increase his majority simply because the locals hate Labour even more than the Tories**. 

* UKIP and the BNP both agree with the Tories on 42 days, they say, making it unlikely they will field candidates - although neither have confirmed this yet 

** See Crewe & Nantwich by-election 

An Ulster Lord has just dropped by to tell me that he will help Davis’s campaign. Not, not from the DUP (who swung Wednesday’s knife-edge vote for Gordon Brown). Lord Laird of Artigarvan, an Ulster Unionist peer, says he despises the alleged deal which will allow Northern Ireland to keep water rates in return for DUP anti-terror backing: “The people of Northern Ireland should realise they are getting cheaper water because some unfortunate guy is in jail”, he thunders.

It’s been a hell of a long time coming and here are the MP expenses highlights. With ear-splitting drum roll………

Tony Blair: £11,200 on a new kitchen in Sedgefield

Gordon Brown: A £4,700 kitchen and a £372 Sky subscription

Peter Mandelson: A £3,000 shower. Correction: bathroom improvements including a shower.

(As passed on by a Tory who spent the last two hours reading the expense claims, by 14 senior MPs, forced into the open today by freedom of information requests).

Senior Tories to follow once we’ve read through pages of this stuff.

 I’ll leave you to decide whether this is a big deal or not. Bear in mind that it has always been open knowledge that MPs could spend about £23,000 a year on mortgage costs, rent and other expenses needed to maintain a second home.

UPDATE:

The Sunday Times has led with the receipt from Ann Keen MP, showing she claimed insurance on her 70-year old husband’s life.  That does seem curious.

We thought the most entertaining nugget was in Gordon Brown’s expenses, where the then Chancellor failed to add up his sums properly - to his own advantage. Here is the full story.

A story this morning by my colleague George Parker about the possible return of Ken Clarke to the Conservative front bench has set the cat among the pigeons.

As always, the charismatic Clarke divides Tory opinion, not least because of his views on Europe. You can get a flavour of the debate on this blog.

A senior Tory tells me, over a cup of Earl Grey, that 30 Labour/Lib Dem councillors have defected to the Conservatives in the last 12 months.

Only one Tory councillor has quit the party during the same period.

UPDATE:

Mea culpa - apparently my source (who should know better - you know who you are) has underestimated the number of Tory defections. Here is a link with some extra information.  

Boris Johnson told the Sun’s website today that he would like an online referendum in London about giving boroughs the power to bring back smoking in pubs and clubs.

It’s a curious idea. Not least because most of us - even some smokers - have got used to being able to breathe fresh air during a night out.  

It’s the second clear policy idea which seems to diverge from Conservative central office. The other was Boris backing an amnesty for illegal immigrants in the UK capital.

Not that Ken Livingstone ever suffered from distancing himself from some Labour policies in the past. 

 (Boris: “What is the point of having local democracy if we don’t leave decisions like this to a local level? If I had my way, we would have an online referendum in London about whether to give boroughs back the power to give discretion over smoking to pubs and clubs.”)

Update: Boris believes his quotes have been misinterpreted. Not sure I believe him for one.

All three parties are playing down their prospects at the May 1 local elections. Even the Tories, who seem most likely to come out with more council seats.

But Labour and the Conservatives are both claiming to be fielding more candidates - according to press releases that came out this afternoon.

Eh?

The difference, apparently, is that Labour is counting England and Wales and the Tories - bizarrely - are ignoring the Welsh.  

Lots of follow-up in the other papers today after the FT’s story on Thursday about the House of Lords being replaced by a “senate” with half the number of occupants. Here is the background article.

Not sure about the idea of “senators”, which is either very old-fashioned (think ancient Rome) or a bit futuristic (think Star Wars, below).

The transfer from the current system to the new one will be intensely complicated.

One of the big unresolved issues  is what to do with the 26 bishops. They sit in the Lords because the Church is/was a major landowner in the UK rather than because of their spiritual influence over Parliament.

But to remove them all would provoke accusations from some quarters - not necessarily from the bishops themselves - that some kind of “disestablishment” is taking place.

Cutting their numbers to a small rump is the current plan. Even that would spark further questions though, such as: why is only the Church of England represented in cosmopolitan UK?

I suspect this one won’t go away for a while.