BNP’s Nick Griffin could lose European seat
November 4, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
British National Party leader Nick Griffin faces losing his European parliamentary seat as the party fights to avoid bankruptcy.
Brown leaves Leicester following BNP row
July 7, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
Preston North End have signed Wayne Brown following the defender’s departure from Leicester City by mutual consent.
Brown was left out of Leicester’s squad for their play-off semi-final matches against Cardiff after he angered teammates, including PFA chairman Chris Powell, by revealing he had voted BNP in the recent general election.
At the time, PFA Deputy Chief Executive Bobby Barnes expressed his disappointment at Brown’s decision.
The PFA has worked for many years with a number of anti-racism bodies to try and eradicate racism from the sport, at all levels, and Barnes felt Brown’s actions had ‘set the movement back’.
“Football has worked hard over the years to really be a beacon in the fight against racism and it is very discouraging to hear these comments when you think of the tireless work so many people, and so many organisations, have put in to get to where we are today.
“In my day as a player you had to contend with racist comments coming from the terraces, so for this to come from within a dressing room is very, very disappointing and our members are angry that Wayne Brown was not prepared to abide by our mission statement.”
How to beat the BNP
May 29, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
It is only through open debate that we can expose the BNP’s false prospectus and vile intentions, argues Margaret Hodge.
By Margaret Hodge
Several symbolic victories lightened the gloom for Labour at the election, but none more so than the trouncing of the BNP in Barking and Dagenham. I doubled my majority; the BNP was driven into third place by the Tories; and all of its councillors lost their seats. In short, the politics of hatred and racism were decisively rejected.
Four years ago, I warned of the dangers of the rise of the extreme Right, after a surge in BNP support in my area. Some believed that by raising the problem, I was creating it. But I remain convinced that we cannot deal with the issue by ignoring it. All that does is add to the alienation of those who believe that politicians don’t listen to their grievances, and haven’t a clue about their concerns.
From Barking to Aberdeenshire
May 29, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Chris Searle
A renowned educationalist critiques recent Citizenship Foundation guidance for teachers on dealing with the BNP and other radical groups in schools.
Speaking in parliament in November 2006, the secretary of state for education and skills, Alan Johnson, described Community Cohesion (which all schools in Britain have a legal responsibility to promote) in the following words: ‘Working towards a society in which there is a common vision and sense of belonging by all communities, a society in which the diversity of people’s backgrounds and circumstances is appreciated and valued; in which similar life opportunities are available to all; and a society in which strong and positive relationships exist and continue to be developed in the workplace, in schools and in the wider community.’
This is a powerful and unambiguous affirmation of societal organisation in which racism and other forms of discrimination have no place and must be given no invitation to promote their ideas, expressions and practices. ‘Schools’ are included as vital institutions and forums where the communal unity of young people and their teachers is a bedrock, and its antagonist racism, must have no admission. Three and half decades ago when the fascist party, the National Front, a forerunner of the British National Party (BNP), was actively promoting racist hatred outside schools and occasionally obtaining local education authority permission to use schools to have their meetings, a generation of activist teachers dedicated to anti-racism, made sure that such meetings were always powerfully picketed and resisted.
I remember one such meeting in the early 1970s at Haggerston School in South Hackney where a group of local teachers including Blair Peach (who was killed by the Metropolitan Police, on their own recent admission, protesting against the National Front in Southall, West London in April 1979) managed to gain entry and disrupt the proceedings before being violently ejected. Teachers like Peach saw any presence of National Front members on or outside school premises as an outrage and they would take whatever expedient was necessary to prevent such an eventuality. They saw it as absolutely necessary as a means of protecting their students and their students’ families from the most dangerous, demeaning and divisive ideas and behaviour and as a first principle of being both a teacher and an active citizen.
Such committed and vigilant opposition is what continues to keep fascism at bay, and this was shown yet again during the May 2010 general and local elections campaigns, where the relentless work of anti-fascists such as those of Unite Against Fascism and Hope Not Hate made a crucial contribution to radically reducing the vote of the BNP in erstwhile strongholds in Stoke-on-Trent, Dudley and particularly in Barking and Dagenham where all twelve BNP councillors and parliamentary candidate and party leader Nick Griffin were overwhelmingly defeated.
Such results are strong stimuli for anti-racist action in schools and colleges and are also at powerful odds with the ‘advice’ offered to British teachers by the ‘Citizenship Foundation and Association for Citizenship Teaching’ in their ‘guidance’ document entitled ‘Dealing with the British National Party and other radical groups’, which ‘attempts to set out the key issues and arguments in order to help schools arrive at a clear policy which can be confidently implemented’. In this exposition, its authors, Billy Crombie and Don Rowe, dignify the BNP by labelling it a ‘radical group’ by virtue of it being one of a number of ‘democratic parties operating within the law’. They ask the question which Blair Peach answered with his protest and ultimately with his life, ‘Should BNP members or other radical parties be allowed in school?’ and posit two approaches. The first is the ‘prohibitive’ position which they state expresses the ‘no platform for racists’ strategy which anti-racist teachers have invoked and manifested for generations. They argue and caricature that such a position is ‘”wheeled out” reactively’ and likely to be ‘experienced as oppressive, selective, “politically correct” and anti-democratic’.
The second is the preferred ‘permissive’ approach which could involve schools inviting in ‘all parties’ including the BNP and hosting a ‘panel in which there is a broad balance of parliamentary candidates, including radical groups’. Thus is the green light given for ushering racist groups like the BNP into the heart of school life and curriculum, an open collusion with racism which needs to be rejected outright by teachers and school governors. That a ‘respectable’, apparently credible and close-to-government ‘charitable’ organisation like the Citizenship Foundation (which received funding from, amongst others, the Cabinet Office, the Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Ministry of Justice and has Cherie Blair QC as a trustee) is commending such an approach is particularly worrying for our schools, their curriculum and most crucially, their students. It is also completely contrary to Alan Johnson’s description of ‘Community Cohesion’.
The alternative strategy is exemplified in the lives and permanent opposition of teachers like Blair Peach. For whenever the BNP or other such antagonists are invited into schools using the bogus rubric of ‘democracy’ to which they have absolutely no alignment, such teachers will organise and resist within their own schools and others too. As parents and community, we must be ready to defend and support them. As a Scottish ‘concerned local resident’ alerted the local school’s constituent parent body and beyond during the pre-election period: ‘The BNP are to appear at a hustings at an Aberdeenshire High school this coming Wednesday. Please help to stop this from happening by calling the principal and voicing your concerns…’
From Aberdeenshire and everywhere, the call still resounds.
—-
FOOTNOTE
Billy Crombie and Don Rowe, 2009, Dealing with the British National Party and other radical groups: guidance for schools, Citizenship Foundation and Association for Citizenship Teaching is available at the link below.
HAT News is precluded from expressing a corporate view: any opinions expressed are therefore those of the authors.
HAT News is not responsible for the content of external websites. Inclusion of a link does not constitute an endorsement.
> RELATED LINKS
Read the Dealing with the British National Party and other radical groups: guidance for schools here (http://www.wdwtwa.org.uk/files/Dealing_with_the_British_National_Party_and_other_radical_groups_-_Guidance_for_Schools.pdf) (pdf file, 120kb)
Read about the Maurice Smith Review here (http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/mauricesmithreview/)
How the media helps the BNP
February 24, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
The Guardian – There was a brilliant column by Johann Hari a few years ago about his experience of appearing on a Sky News programme hosted by newspaper columnist Richard Littlejohn. Having admitted he didn’t know how much an asylum seeker got in benefits, Littlejohn screeched at Hari: “It’s people like you who help the BNP!”
Now, you could be forgiven for thinking that the election of two MEPs would bring the BNP under closer scrutiny since last year. Surely the media glare would expose its nasty underbelly? The party’s deputy leader, Simon Darby, doesn’t seem to think so:
Honest Debate about Immigration Necessary
January 18, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
The Observer – It is now generally recognised in British politics that expressing concern about the scale of recent immigration into the country is not necessarily a sign of racism.
That is an important point, since the alternative is to impose on mainstream politicians a fear of unjustified condemnation. Too much caution in touching the subject risks surrendering the terms of debate to the real racists: the British National party.
It is partly a rise in the BNP’s profile that has changed the way the issue is discussed, not always for the better.
There is no doubting the impact of recent, sustained high levels of immigration. As the Observer reports today, a new study commissioned by the Equality and Human Rights Commission estimates that 1.5 million workers have come from eastern Europe alone since 2004. They took the opportunity of EU enlargement to seek opportunities in Britain’s then buoyant labour market.
Our society does kind of work . . . sort of
September 11, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Hugh Muir
The big day arrives and Nick Griffin, leader of the racist BNP, finally prepares to take his seat on Question Time – only to find there have been some changes. David Dimbleby has swine flu; instead, host for the evening will be Sir Trevor MacDonald. Diane Abbott, Jesse Jackson, Linda Bellos and the comedian Shazia Mirza are the other panellists. The venue has changed, too; unavoidable, a regrettable case of double booking. Still, all will go well in Handsworth, he is told. The alternative was Peckham.
This is all fantasy, alas, for Dimbleby is in rude health, and the chances are that quite a few of our would-be panellists wouldn’t hose Griffin down if he was on fire, much less appear alongside Britain’s most high-profile extremist. But what is not fantasy is that Griffin will appear on Question Time sometime soon, and as he prepares to parade his bigotry to the nation on prime time, it might be a good moment to reflect on a few hard facts about the country he now represents in Brussels.
Eighty-five per cent of the inhabitants of our country describe themselves as white British. The largest visible minority group is of Indian origin, comprising just 2% of the population. And forget headlines to the contrary; about half of us are optimistic that Britain will be a more tolerant society in 10 years’ time, and 70% would be comfortable – in theory – to see their children choose a partner of a different race or faith. And that’s just as well, for many of them already have. Nine per cent of our children live in homes with multiple heritages: 9% and rising. People voting with their squashy bits. The dreaded miscegenation, Mr Griffin. Horizontal integration.
The facts do not suggest that indigenous white Britain feels besieged by different races. In fact, for the most part, “native” Britons, as Griffin likes to call those deemed acceptable, handle the juxtaposition of people with different skin colours comparatively well. Certainly better than many countries on mainland Europe: just ask many black British families about their experiences on trips to places such as Italy, Germany and parts of France.
Even the BNP, in its public pronouncements, recognises this. Oh, they don’t like the darkies and never will, but the sell to the public has, through necessity, been repackaged. It’s not the darkies per se, it’s the crime they bring with them. It’s not the Muslims because of who they are – yeah, right? – it’s what they do. It’s not that we’re afraid of difference, but these Poles, half of them don’t even speak proper English. And they work too cheaply.
The frontline was once marked out by race, but these days it zigzags: it’s race, it’s culture, it’s working space, it’s living space. It’s how much immigrants have brought with them; how much they have left behind. How much they are willing to compromise; how much others in society think they should.
How well Britain deals with diversity is not so much about a yearning for homogeneity. Instead, the drama we see being played out daily is about the rules of engagement. That makes it sound bloodless; it’s anything but. The rules of engagement will govern whether parents, be they Jewish, Muslim or Catholic, are allowed to separate their children in their own schools. Whether they want to. Whether anxieties are eased about the burka. Whether they ought to be. Whether, or when, we all speak English. It’s bare-knuckle stuff. It raises hackles. It’s all sensitive.
Our society may not always work as we would like it to, but it does kind of work, even as we read about the rows and conflicts, magnified through the crooked lenses of some newspapers. Even as we laugh at Carol Thatcher trying to explain that she didn’t know it was non-U to describe a black man as a golliwog. Even when a councillor in Barnet blacks up for a fancy dress party as Nelson Mandela and professes surprise when people object. Even when white far-righters and football hooligans, self-cast as warriors against “Islamic extremism”, clash with Asian youths in Birmingham. Even when, as occurred this week, commentators despair because so many babies born last year were called Mohammed.
The interaction between the various and varied elements of our 21st-century society causes worry, confusion, sometimes discord, sometimes bloodshed – but isn’t that inevitable? It is fascinating, but it shouldn’t be justification for doom and gloom. It’s just the way we rub along, progressing step by uncertain step.
HAT News is not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are of the author’s alone.
Red Cross refugee study shows how the BNP sneaked in
June 10, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Tom Parry
As the racist BNP celebrates its first European Parliament seats, a Red Cross study on British attitudes to refugees gives a telling insight into the prejudices they have exploited to limited success.
The globally respected charity found nearly a quarter of people believe there are more than 100,000 asylum applications every year – about four times the annual figure of 25,670.
Meanwhile just 5 per cent of Britons know to within 10,000 how many refugees come to the UK every year.
The Red Cross found the negative image of asylum-seekers among the 18-24 age group was of particular concern.
Nearly two-thirds chose the word “uneducated” and 33 per cent used “hostile” when asked to describe refugees.
What the BNP has done throughout its election campaign is exploit this very same widespread prejudice – and glibly transform it into fact.
The fascist party turns on anyone who dares criticise its stance on immigration issues as a member of an imaginary establishment conspiracy.
I experienced this deliberate paranoia on virtually every occasion I had to call deputy leader Simon Darby during the Mirror’s Hope not Hate campaign.
It fits in with the phoney image Nick Griffin, Simon Darby and their cohorts have painted; of themselves being the victims rather than the desperate refugees who flee war in Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan in search of sanctuary in a free country like Britain.
A spokesman for the Red Cross said: “There is a clear gap between what people think is the level of asylum-seekers entering the UK and the reality. They are getting figures from the media and basing their opinions on perceptions that are not true.
“The number of refugees coming to the UK is far lower than most people think. It is interesting to note that when people are asked to describe refugees and base their opinions on people they know or have met then you find many more positive associations.”
Titcha Kanjanda, 38, who fled Zimbabwe and is now studying for a social care degree in Portsmouth, said refugees needed to be allowed to feel proud of themselves by contributing to their adoptive country.
She said: “I didn’t want to leave but circumstances forced me to. I’m not a liability, I want to be an asset. I want people to realise ’she’s a refugee, but she’s working towards the development of this country’.”
Her earnest comment is one Griffin – who sparked a storm by referring to the “bloodless genocide” created by immigrants arriving in Britain – would prefer to ignore.
While being harangued by BNP supporters in Ferryhill, County Durham, a few weeks ago
I saw first-hand that the last thing they all want is to be presented with facts that don’t fit their distorted vision.
This is why it is important that life-saving groups like the Red Cross can do their vital work without the silly distractions invented by the BNP’s propaganda. – The Mirror
* Tom Parry has been a Daily Mirror journalist since 2003. As a published travel writer, he has covered many stories in the developing world.
From the street to the screen
May 21, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Matthew Goodwin
Whether or not the European elections in June will produce Britain’s first ever far-right MEP, the British National Party (BNP) poses a real threat.
Although the far right is often viewed as an ephemeral phenomenon, the factors underpinning its support are not. Working-class anxieties over immigration and multiculturalism are often dismissed as bigotry, but concerns run deep.
According to one poll, 60 per cent of Britons feel that there are too many immigrants in Britain, and 80 per cent feel that the government has lied to them about the scale of migration. In another poll conducted on the 40th anniversary of Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech, nearly half of voters said they would support policies encouraging migrants to return to their country of origin.
And immigration is brought up by between three and four in every ten respondents in regular MORI polls asking about the most important problems facing the country. Put simply, these concerns need to be addressed.
Another reason the BNP needs to be taken seriously is its changing strategy. It is often pointed out that the party has replaced boots with suits and ditched street fighting for community politics. Yet arguably the most significant change has taken place in cyberspace.
According to the Alexa rank, which measures the level of traffic to an internet site over the past three months, the BNP, in 45,000th place, easily outperforms all the major parties (as well as other popular political sites such as the Guido Fawkes blog, which is at 57,000th).
The BNP also finishes first when the average number of minutes that users spend on a site is taken into account: over the past three months visitors to its site spent longer there than users on the website of any other political party. Surfers on the BNP site spent on average 6.3 minutes a day checking out the party and its ideas, compared to 2.6 minutes for the Conservatives.
For the European elections, the BNP is launching an unprecedented online campaign. While retaining its emphasis on door-to-door canvassing, the party will also use online advertisements and send text messages to random numbers, asking voters to donate small sums and spread the word to friends and family. Voters who decide to make an inquiry will find themselves directed to one of several call centres that the BNP has set up in the hope that, whether or not it wins a seat at Strasbourg, it will finish the campaign with a much-enlarged membership base.
The BNP’s shift towards an Obama-style online strategy enables it to circumvent the tactics used by other parties to starve it of publicity, and also shows up the dangers of that approach.
Previously, mainstream politicians have refused to co-operate with democratically elected BNP councillors, and newspapers have ignored or condemned the far right. But this risks fuelling a sense among voters that the Establishment is out of touch and does not take their concerns seriously.
Meanwhile, the durability of BNP support in areas such as Barking, Dagenham and Stoke shows that just simply bashing the party as “Nazi” no longer works. Voters in some areas are so exasperated with the political Establishment, and so desperate for an alternative, that they don’t care about the party’s extremist credentials.
The BNP is sidestepping a hostile press and an indifferent political elite by delivering its message direct to the desktop. Regardless of what happens in June, the challenge it poses is now more complex and multifaceted in nature, and calls for a more innovative response than that which is currently on offer.
This article was first published in the New Statesman on 21 May 2009.
Matthew Goodwin is a fellow of the Institute for Political and Economic Governance at the University of Manchester
*Hatnews is not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author’s alone.
BNP links to immigration service staff
January 15, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
An official investigation has been launched after two immigration service staff working with asylum-seekers were found to have links to the British National Party, The Independent newspaper revealed yesterday.
One guard employed to look after asylum-seekers at a detention centre has been forced to resign after his name was found on a membership list of the BNP. Another man has been suspended while his employer investigates alleged links to the same far-right organisation.
Both cases raise serious concerns about racism within the immigration system, where membership of extreme political groups has long been suspected. Over the past two years The Independent has helped reveal nearly 300 allegations of brutality, including 38 claims of racism, made by asylum-seekers about private security and immigration staff. Some of the allegations included abusive and racist language, in which refugees fleeing persecution were referred to as “monkeys” or told to “go back to their own countries”.
The only two services where membership of the BNP can be grounds for dismissal are the police force and the Prison Service.
In the case of the immigration service, everyone working in immigration removal centres or in the guarding or removal of asylum-seekers must sign a declaration making clear that they are not members of the BNP, Combat 18 or the National Front. Those who are found to belong to any group that promotes racism will lose their accreditation to work in the immigration system.
Last night, the UK Border Agency said it “will not tolerate racist behaviour by individuals working in immigration removal centres. All allegations are investigated and the UKBA can revoke an individual’s accreditation to work for the agency or have any contact with detainees.”
It is understood that a security guard resigned after a list of BNP members was leaked to the media last year.
In the case of the suspended guard, the investigation is being conducted by the private contractor. During his suspension, the man will not be able to work with refugees or enter any immigration building.
BNP policy on immigration stipulates: “We will also clamp down on the flood of ‘asylum-seekers’, all of whom are either bogus or can find refuge much nearer their home countries.”
Last month the Home Office received another report, this time from its own complaints watchdog, that raised serious concerns about the treatment of complaints of racism made by asylum-seekers, many of which had been miscategorised as “poor service” complaints. The report, written by the Home Office’s Complaints Audit Committee (CAC), and seen by The Independent, said senior officials had “joined us in voicing concern that serious complaints such as allegations of assault aggravated by racism have been handled as service delivery complaints and as a consequence have not been properly managed”.
The Labour MP Diane Abbott said last night: “If it is true that staff employed to work with asylum-seekers and immigrants are members of the BNP then it is yet another sign that the Home Office are allowing for the mistreatment of immigrants in this country. For years, campaign groups and my colleagues and I have been pointing out that hiring private contractors to work as immigration guards is a bad idea. It seems we will now have more proof of this. People who come to this country deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect that is afforded to citizens.”
A spokesperson for Medical Justice, which helped compile a dossier of nearly 300 complaints of alleged abuse, said: “We hear detainees complain about racism on an almost daily basis and it’s virtually unheard of for a complaint to be upheld. The sheer volume of detainees complaining suggests among certain immigration guards there seems to be a canteen culture of racism which can flourish if left unchecked. Detainees feel dehumanised.”
In its report, the CAC further warned: “Complaints of racism have caused us concern, as failures to report and investigate them fully may leave the UK Border Agency liable to prosecution under the Race Relations Act and to other anti-discrimination legislation… We have learnt of special problems in the detention estate, where complaints forms have a tick-box marked ‘racism’ and where officials believe that racism has been widely used as an inappropriate add-on to service delivery complaints, such as a detainee claiming that he had been served cold food because of his ethnic origin.
“We have reservations about the accuracy of this view in light of Sir William MacPherson’s definition of a racist incident as ‘any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person’. As we do not routinely audit service delivery complaints, we cannot calculate the extent of alleged misuse of the term ‘racist’.”
The CAC said the Home Office should have supplied all misconduct complaints alleging racism. “We received only four complaints of racism from Colnbrook [detention centre, near Heathrow Airport] in 2007. This would appear to be a low number of potential complaints according to evidence collected by the HMIP [prison inspectorate] team, whose survey yielded the information that 18 per cent of detainees said they had been victimised by staff on the basis of their nationality and 15 per cent said they had been victimised on the basis of their ethnic or cultural origin.” – The Independent
