The BNP and Question Time

Well every other commentator and pundit is having their say, so I suppose I should too.

The BNP has some odious views but it is a legitimate political party which achieved a large vote at the last EU elections and if the Green Party are allowed a place on Question Time then so should they.

The problem here is almost entirely due to the Labour Party and the BBC's stupidity in ignoring the BNP for so long. The Labour Party's headlong rush for the votes of minority groups and its habit of appeasing its "bleeding heart" wing meant that white-working class voters left the party that seemed to have left them and found an alternative socialist party, the BNP. Recently some Labour MPs have reacted to the rise of the BNP by addressing concerns but Margaret Hodge in Barking and Jon Cruddas in Dagenham have been in the minority. Gordon Brown in his usual clod-hopping manner managed to exacerbate the issue with his "British jobs for British workers" speech, which gave more publicity to the BNP at a most opportune (for the BNP) time. Meanwhile the BBC managed to imbue the BNP with a degree of street-cred by demonising them at every opportunity.

Where the BBC have really fallen down is over the arrangements for tonight's Question Time. The whole programme is being dominated by Nick Griffin's presence on the panel, the debate over who is going to appear alongside him and the report I read yesterday that said that David Dimbleby will rigorously question Nick Griffin on points raised by the audience. The BBC are taking a big risk by doing this. It may make Nick Griffin look as though he is being attacked from all sides; the four other panellists, the audience, David Dimbleby and the protesters outside. It also risks making Nick Griffin look more important than he is: why is he so important that he has to be singled out for more attention than the other panellists?

The choice of questions tonight will also be important. By rights the 70 million population story should be one matter for discussion but that would play into Nick Griffin's hands so will the BBC ignore that subject and so try and neuter Nick Griffin's chance to talk about the consequences of immigration or will they try and let him have his head over the subject and pull him up on any "thought-crimes".

The views of the Unite Against Facism crowd and others on the vile Victoria Derbyshire's 5Live programme this morning were ridiculous. They seemed to argue that no racist opinions should ever be heard on the BBC; a deny them the oxygen of publicity type policy. The trouble is that the BBC already gives airtime to people with even more unpleasant and dangerous views than Nick Griffin; Anjem Choudary for one. People with unpleasant views need to have those views challenged not ignored. Peter Hain's calls for the BBC to rethink its invitation to the BNP show quite how illiberal many of those on the left of politics really are. Ken Livingstone came out with the comment that "Unlike any other party, when Nick Griffin speaks, or when they get elected in an area, what we see is an increase in racial attacks.". I would like to see the figures that Ken bases his claim upon and whether there are similar figures for attacks on Jews following speeches made by radical Islamists invited by Ken Livingstone to speak when he was London Mayor.

This Labour government decided for various reasons; some honourable, some not, to allow immigration into the UK to massively increase from 1997. The decision to lie about the levels and implications was a poor, if understandable, one. The BNP's rise in the polls is just one result of that imposed policy and the Labour party and their allies in the BBC will have to get used to the BNP making increasing inroads into the political life of the UK.

As the recession bites harder and the necessary spending cuts and tax rises are imposed (by whichever party is in government next year) the ground will become more fertile for parties such as the BNP who have scapegoats to lay the blame for the economic situation onto. What worked for the Nazi party in Weimar Germany during the last great depression of the 1930s may well work for the BNP and similar parties across Europe. That is a profoundly depressing thought for me and I am sure for many others, but ignoring the BNP won't make them disappear.


As I have said before, I sincerely doubt that either I or Mrs NotaSheep would be eligible to join the BNP (not that we want to) but unlike the many protesters who seem obsessed by that fact, I don't care. There were a number of black Britons interviewed on the BBC this morning who seemed distressed that they could not join the BNP; why would they want to? If a policeman, I would not be eligible to join the National Black Police Association, so what? If a lawyer, I would not be eligible to join The Association of Muslim Lawyers, so what?