Democracy must come first
At the time of the furore over Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time, I made it clear that I believed that no platform was not a solution to the BNP and other fascist parties. I was surprised how many people, particularly members of the Labour party, believed that free speech should be denied to legal political parties and their representatives. Now it appears that one Labour MP is going even further, by stating that we should ensure the electoral system stops people he doesn’t like from being elected.
Just in case my previous posts have not made it clear, I totally despise the BNP. We have representatives of the party on both our District and County council, so I know what it’s like to have them strutting around, but readers of our local paper will know my feelings about the party, as expressed on the Letters page. At Three Rivers, we have decided to treat the BNP councillor exactly as the law requires, no more and no less. To do otherwise would be an affront to democracy and would simply increase the BNP’s ability to say that they were different to all the other parties and outside the political system, thus increasing their appeal to disenchanted voters.
Scottish MP Tom Harris takes up the ‘no platform’ position,, supplementing it with a call to prevent the BNP being elected – by fair means or foul. To him, the way to keep the BNP mostly unelected is to keep rigging the electoral system. His assertion that the end justifies the means illustrates exactly why the Labour Party look tired, dated and out of step with the desire for real change in our political system. Tom uses the BNP to justify his opposition to electoral reform in the elections for both Houses of Parliament by stating that proportional representation for the Commons and an elected second chamber would lead to the election of more representatives of far-right parties.
Tom thinks he has the answer against using political debate and interaction to stem the BNP:
“Ah,” the retort comes, “you can’t stop the BNP by gerrymandering the electoral system. You have to beat them with argument.” Yeah? And how did that work out in the European elections?
Actually, it worked quite well. Despite various Labour politicians talking up the BNP vote in a shameful attempt to scare electors back into voting Labour, the BNP vote at the European Elections increased by a paltry 1% from 2004. If the Labour vote had not collapsed by a quarter, with previous Labour supporters unwilling to go out and vote for the party this time, we would not have Nick Griffin MEP. But this thought has obviously not crossed Tom’s mind:
Here’s a fact – and you can either accept it now or accept it when it happens, it’s up to you – a second chamber elected by any system of PR will include in its membership, at some point, members of the far right of British politics.
So politicians should give up trying to fight the racist parties and simply gerrymander the political system, keeping it as an inflexible tool which gives very little power to the voters to determine which policies are put into practice and keeps government on a see-saw? How trusting of the electorate! How keen to reflect their views and ensure that government at all levels is truly representative! Not! We have already seen the ridiculous obviousness of Parliament removing passes from all MEPs, just so that they don’t have to give them to Messrs Griffin and Brons. Now Harris goes further, by using this as an excuse to block the reform this country so badly needs. What a compliment to pay this racist and dysfunctional excuse for a political party!
Whilst electoral reform would probably see the election of further BNP representatives, other small parties would also prosper, particularly on the Left – the Greens, Socialist parties and independents. I suspect that there would be far more additional progressive representation than there would fascists. Is the old Labour Party worried about leaking further votes in its heartlands?
But at LabourList, there is disagreement with Tom’s ideas:
“What we do do however is to fight back directly. The rise of the BNP shows an alarming lack of political education among some, a frightening gulf between the electorate and the politicians (and I am referring to those who do not vote), and the fact that those of us who are political anoraks have become too insular.
“What we do therefore is to work to improve communications and help foster ideas where we have been lacking. It also means (cough) working alongside Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and for both sides to stop using the BNP as a slur on our opponents (i.e. whether the BNP are left and right-wing). The BNP are active and unpleasant racists, that is why they must be stopped. End of!”
Hear, hear! We cannot keep backing away from the BNP, placing artificial barriers in their way, rather than taking them on and defeating them in voters’ hearts and minds. Just preventing them from gaining representation by gerrymandering is allowing the BNP to make you play by their fascist rules. How ironic if Labour seek to beat a fascist party by behaving in a fascist manner towards them.
Related posts:
- Don't let the charmers break your heart
- So almost no-one agreed with Nick – and he doesn’t understand why?
- Nick Griffin: wary of the issues and scared of the LibDems
Comments
Leave a Reply:
