Posts Tagged "Comrades"

From the 'Man on the Inside'

My good friend Simon Budden has written in to give his account of the event on Friday. Here he tells us what happened from inside the building.

By Simon Budden

While Hadleigh stayed outside during the protest at the Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institute (BRLSI), I managed to make my way into the building and I remained there throughout the protest and the speeches that eventually took place.

I have little to add to Hadleigh’s account of the evening, which is very accurate and records how an evening of speeches (to which all candidates in the European Parliament elections were invited – including the BNP) was protested against but took place, albeit, in a reduced form.

Long past the original start time and with only four candidates, the event eventually began. I should note that, due to the protest, the audience consisted of approximately 80-90% BNP supporters and the candidates were only given 5-10 minutes to speak with (unfortunately) no time for questions.

Thus, the audience received speeches from the candidates of the English Democrats Party, Libertas, the Christian People’s Alliance and the British National Party (in order).

The English Democrats Party’s speech outlined their main (only) policy, that of fighting for an English Parliament. This seemed out of place given that the European Parliament elections were the focus of the evening.

Libertas presented themselves as a pro-EU party with their single policy of reforming the European Union. This is mainly by means of empowering the elected representatives of the Parliament, as opposed to the appointed Commission. This seemed reasonable and honest; although I profess that I am not an expert on Libertas.

Stuck Inside: A few punters who breached the blockade

The Christian People’s Alliance, similar to that of the English Democrats candidate, spent a large portion of time describing what his party was and didn’t give any European policies.

Finally, the British National Party candidate took his turn to speak. He began by commenting that he had recently returned from Gibraltar, claiming that the Gibraltar Chronicle and the Gibraltar Broadcasting Corporation had been “very sympathetic” to what he had said.

He also laid out his stance as pro-U.K. and (in contrast to other candidates) found it necessary to point out that the suit he was wearing was made by an Indian gentleman and that his account was Chinese, before she sold her company.

Moving on, he informed the audience that there was absolutely nothing that the United Kingdom could do in order to stop immigrants from entering the U.K., due to the European Union. Immigrants who only take from the welfare state, and contribute nothing. Added to this, was the promise that the BNP would eradicate all foreign aid, instead helping pensioners.

The BNP candidate finished with the claim that the European Union is very wasteful. He gave the figure that each MEP costs £125,000 per year, although the sources were not elaborated on and no description was given of the work that MEPs undertake.

The BNP candidate then received a standing ovation from many in the audience, all of whom, I suspect were BNP supporters before the speech. A number of people (author included) neither stood, nor clapped.

Overall, the impression that I came away with was that the BNP thought of the evening as a victory for themselves, in the guise of the democracy. They had beaten the protesters and been allowed to speak. However, had the evening gone as planned and had many people from many parties taken part, I feel that there would have been a different outcome.

The lack of time of questions (along with the large BNP contingent) meant that we were unable to tackle any of the claims made. This would have been avoided, had the public been allowed to enter the building.

Since it hasn’t been mentioned here yet, the following quote was used twice to sum up a part of the spirit inside the building.

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your rights to say it”

Most people attribute it to Voltaire, but there is some debate. However, I wish the event could have been summed up with another quote:

“The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously” – Hubert H. Humphrey

Anti-BNP Demonstration at BRLSI Meeting

Further to my previous posts here and here regarding the controversial decision to invite the BNP to speak at a debate on the European Elections of June 4th 2009, this is my account of what occured at the meeting.

Arriving at about 1830 (I had aimed to get there at 1800, but the bus hit a very expensive looking-car half way down Bathwick Hill, so we decided to walk), there were dozens of protesters from various different groups, including the Bath Activist Network, Unite, Bath Labour Students, Bath LGBT group, the various political parties, a group whom I suppose were “Anarchists” and some people who probably didn’t know what was going on.

For about 30 minutes everything remained reasonably calm as cars passed by and occaisionally beeped their horns, greeted by a return cheer from protesters. Doors opened a little after 1900 and by 1913 things started to kick off.

As punters arrived and attempted to enter the public meeting, a few of the Anarchists (with the black hoodies and scarves over their faces) sat at the top of the stairs to block people in. An elederly gentleman tried reasoned argument about democracy and freedom of speech and so on, but it fell on tin, hoodied ears. He tried to step over the teenagers but was tripped up. Eventually he managed to get in.

At this point, a few punters were able to hop over the line as they followed a policemen in. This could not have been more than ten or so, before more protesters began to copy the television and linked arms, blocking the steps as seen here:

By 1923, the entrance was totally blocked with only of handful of police around. Soon after, a group of BNP members arrived, most of whom conformed to the stereotype of big, shaven-headed types. Albeit in ugly suits. It was sad to see a few young teenagers who probably weren’t into being shouted at, but I didn’t really stop to chat.

At 1945, traffic was stopped completely and a second wave of police arrvied, numbering about ten. There was a lull while people waited for something to happen. The police put on their helmets. The speaker from one of the fringe parties (I understand the member ship was 2) made an empassioned speech that bemused the crowd.

A large police van pulled up at 2004 and a “senior police officer” proceeded to read a statement to the blockade claiming that the meeting was cancelled. (Image below).

The police, numbering about 25, formed a circular barrier around the entrance to clear a space. One by one, the protesters were peeled off from the blockade at 2023. (Image below) Most of them came quietly, and were ‘released into the wild’ with everbody else. A few of them decided to put up a bit of a struggle, but the police carried them out.

Though there were cries of “pigs” and “fascists” and other insults (like what they saw covered by the G20 protests) directed towards the police, I think it’s worth pointing out that the Bath Police did a really good job at what was clearly a very difficult situation. They weren’t equipped for dealing with crwods and it seemed like nobody was sure what to do, but in my opinion it was handled very well.

As the BNP group was admitted, at 2031, it became apparant that the meeting was not really going to happen. Ricky Knight from the Green Party took the stage by shouting face-to-face at the BNP candidate, there was chanting of “Shame on you” (presumably they were unaware of Al Murray’s comedy catchphrase)  seen in this video:

By 2040, Liberal Democrat Graham Watson MEP was fed up and went home. Inside the building, the speaker sfrom the BNP and the English Democrats were ready to speak. A vote was taken and it was decided that they would be permitted to give their speech.

Back outside, somebody had got hold of a megaphone and was passing it around as every randomer suddenly had something to say”Um, er, you know. Fascism is bad.”  Next.  I was waited patiently for my turn. It didn’t come. Glyn Ford got to the mic to explain his position. Here he is talking about Jean-Marie Le Pen:

At 2048, the few people inside, now including Libertas, began to speak, though the crowd was mostly BNP. There were no questions. The protesters didn’t know this (I had a friend on the inside) and left as it got dark , probably time for dinner anyway.

Some police dispersed and traffice was reopened at 2051. Only a few people stayed behind and a group of policemen stayed around the door.

So, by way of a conclusion: Sadly, democracy was obstructed. Glyn Ford specfically said that although he was taking a ‘No Platform’ stance, he was no there to prevent the meeting from taking place, but the various other groups didn’t take this line. I don’t know what the teenagers thought they were doing, but it didn’t work anyway.

The BNP spoke, which some of the protesters tried to stop (and failed) and it was another own-goal for them because now there was nobody inside to listen and challenge them.

In my opinion, though I think it’s good there were so many demonstraters around from very diverse organisations, it was wrong to stop the meeting. I can totally understand why people operate a “No Platform Policy” but I, like many others, prefer to challenge and question. Chances are they’re damned out of their own mouth anyway.

All very messy.

We're going to get hammered on June 4th – and videos like these don't help

I am absolutely furious at the disgraceful PPB released last week. There was no mention of Europe for the European Parliament Elections, there was no mention of councils for the Local Elections, and there was barely any mention of Labour either.

The broadcast was 2:40 of pure negative embarrassment. It is an obviously testing time for many Labour activists and with every punch the man in the video laid on that punch bag, it felt like one more blow to my self-respect as a Labour member. David Cameron would do X, David Cameron would do Y. Well what are we going to do? Yes, the broadcast may have been factual; yes, these things need to be said, but Labour comes across as a bully, scaremongering the electorate into voting for it. Maybe I’m a romantic, but I would prefer to ask people to vote out of support for us rather than fear of the opposition.

Before I go on to talk about the Party at large, I want to talk more specifically about this broadcast. Not only was it a more despicable campaign than the one in Crewe & Nantwich, it was also poorly executed. The people who made this video need hurling into the boardroom for a right ticking off from Sir Alan. Given a camera and a tenner, I would have produced a better PPB, and made a tenner. I’m no spin doctor, but I know that the first 30 seconds of a PPB should not be some mystery bloke walking up to a punch bag, and it shouldn’t continue for a cumulative minute throughout. “Where’s yer bloody product?”

Contrast this with, say, the Green Party broadcast: It was interesting, simple, and coherent, struck the right tone, dealt with misconceptions while also promoting their policy, with a decent dose of humour too. Contrast our broadcast with that of the Welsh Labour Party too, which was all-in-all a good PPB because it used the platform to promote the program. Rhodri Morgan talking about people “not getting paid to sit at home, but getting paid to train three days a week and work the other two” is exactly the kind of message we as Labourites should be sending all across the country. He even mentioned the word “Europe”.

“Europe” brings me neatly to the Conservative Broadcast. Too bad for us, it was a stroke of genius and Cameron killed two birds with one stone. He realised that nobody really cares about the European Elections, which is symptomatic of how little priority all the parties have given their MEPs, none of whom feature in our broadcast to talk about what they’ve been up to. He realised that voters want to sort out MPs’ expenses. Cameron confronted this immediately, and on top of that, he managed to avoid alienating half of his party by steering well clear of Europe. (UKIP’s PPB, while giving the impression of a daytime TV accident helpline advert, at least stated their case).

Controversially, offence is the best form of defence. We don’t need to focus on defending record in government which should speak for itself; we do need to show a way for the future. This is not to say that the two are mutually exclusive, but there is now a Blairite Generation of first-time voters (myself included) who don’t remember first hand how bad the Tories were, and there are even more (myself not included) who don’t even care.

Negative campaigning is both necessary and effective, but it won’t work for us in this situation. Labour is deeply unpopular by itself, so it’s up to us to sort it out, though when I say “us” here, I mean of course “them”, the people like “Gordon”, “Harriet” and “Ed” who keep emailing me to tell me everything is fine and that we’re actually 20 points ahead, it’s just that the newspapers (boo hiss) are bitter, and the PM is actually brilliant, oh and it’s America’s fault too.

There’s an argument I’ve heard around the Internet that “you just can’t attack Cameron” because he is genuinely liked. You’re much better off attacking the run-of-the-mill moat-owning Tory. This is true for the moment, but I believe it may be more effective to paint Cameron neither as a “shallow salesman” nor as “chief economic adviser to the Treasury on Black” when he was apparently little more than an intern. It’s my understanding that he was Michael Howard’s right hand man and chief speechwriter. He’s the Sorcerer’s Apprentice who wrote some of the worst kind of Tory anti-immigration scaremongering. You need a mix of positive and negative stuff.

I do blame Brown for the weakness of the Cabinet and of the Party. For a decade, the government was distracted by his ego, as he as his “Brownites” crushed and pushed any potential rival out of the way and blocked reform at any opportunity. It is for this reason Tony Blair hesitated to promote David Miliband, as much as we say “Brown’s Budget” instead of Alastair Darling’s, why Alan Milburn was sent to the back, and why Blunkett and Clarke had their trigger fingers ready. Dominated by Brown’s “flawed” personality, the legislative program has come to a complete halt.

Unfortunately, Labour’s interests are currently no longer compatible with those of the nation. Of course it is in the interest of the country to have a Labour government (not matter how bad Brown is, I can’t believe that Cameron will be better), but it is not in the Party’s interests to be in government. We need to finish modernising; there will be former Labour activists, who left because of Blair and Iraq and so forth, who have been waiting on the sidelines with their watches out waiting to pronounce the time-of-death of New Labour. This is no time to “go back” to Old Labour, as we so desperately need to go forward. The Old/New Labour divide remains a scar on the party that has to be overcome the PLP has to get over labels, whether they be Blairites, Brownites, Brownies, Harmen, or Milibandistas.

We’re going to get hammered on June 4th (though I’ll still be working faithfully in Regional Office up to polling day). By coincidence, so will our friends in the French Parti Socialiste, who have also had their fair share of leadership issues. They, however, have the advantage of Opposition. It is lamentable that when the world needs a credible centre-left ideology in the wake of an unprecedented economic crisis, Social Democrats across Europe have been caught unawares, despite the relative success of Zapatero’s PSOE; we have heard strangely little from him.

The impression I get from various people is that we are somehow repeating history. We might be in for a circa 1997 landslide, it might be a new Thatcher ‘83. High-up Labour figures suggest that we’re actually back in 1992. None of these seem very appealing to me, for if by some miracle we were to win the next General Election, without a battle plan in “the fight for Britain’s future” it might be better to cut our losses before it gets so bad we’re out for another 18 years. We have to reunite, rethink and be ready to return in four years time.

Article after article on LabourList, I see saccharin phrases like “if we get rid of Brown, that’s just what the Tories want” as if the Tories don’t want a worn out Labour leader who is politically inept, nationally despised and who can’t flash a decent smile. There will be people who will call me a “defeatist” or a “fatalist”; in return I’ll call them “complacent” and “foolish”. I can’t remember where I read it, either LabourList or LabourHome, but the fact we’ve fallen below 30% (20% on some polls) means that even the ‘core vote’ is deserting us. There is no hope that, unlike what the emails tell us, the Tories will come unstuck over policy, because they are not going to face any scrutiny while everyone watches Labour stumble behind from disaster to disaster. The party is at its lowest rating ever and ministers need to get their act together.

Update: BNP back in Bath

There have been some changes to the BRLSI event regarding the hustings for the European Elections.

In light of the wave of walkouts lead by Labour’s Glyn Ford MEP, followed by Lib Dem Graham Watson MEP and Green Party Ricky Knight who all refused to share a platform with the British National Party candidate Jeremy Wotherspoon.

Conservative Dan Collier then jumped on the bandwagon. As a result of the boycott of the all three major parties, the format of the event has changed from a typical panel debate to that of a “job interview”.

Graham Watson MEP of the Lib Dems, while understandably (and respectably) keen to debate, quickly changed his position, justifying the U-turn with a cop-out; “I only said I wouldn’t share a platform with a BNP representative.”

The Conservatives are now are “considering [their] options in light of the changing circumstances” and the Green Party candidate has said that “It seams a very surreal compromise, and I am not really sure what action we will be taking.”

Glyn Ford has remained result, stating that “”It is vital to mobilise people to combat the threat of the British National Party. Unfortunately, we are in a position in the South West, which could well see a member of the BNP being elected to the European Parliament in the elections on 4 June this year.”

Far-Right French MEP, Jean-Marie Le Pen, of the Front National (You might call it the French BNP) has previously described Glyn Ford as “one of the seven most dangerous left-wing men in Europe.”

Also on the ballot will be Katie Hopkins “the really evil one from The Apprentice” who is running as an Independent.

I was invited to a Facebook group recently called “Students voting against the BNP on the 4th of June”. I declined to join, as I will not be voting against anybody, I will be voting for someone. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you who.

BNP back in Bath

Glyn Ford, Labour MEP for the South West, came to Bath yesterday and told me an interesting story about a debate due to happen in Bath.

Hattie and Glyn

Glyn Ford MEP and Hattie Ajderian, Labour PPC for Bath.

It seems that Unlock Democracy (formerly Charter 88) has been organising a Hustings Session at the BRLSI on May 22nd in time for the European Parliament elections.

The Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem parties are planning to meet together to discuss how to handle the BNP but in the meantime, the Labour Party has a strict No Platform Policy when it comes to the BNP. It has to be said that in principle I don’t like “No Platform” policies, but I also don’t think there’s much point in debating with the likes of the BNP. UKIP and the Tories are a laugh, but the BNP is a joke.

As a result, Glyn Ford MEP and all the other Labour Candidates have refused to participate. There has been no concern from the Tories on the matter yet.

Unlock Democracy has put considerable pressure on Labour over the matter, but Glyn Ford who is the national Treasurer for the Anti-Nazi League and a member of Unite Against Fascism’s steering committee said he would be happy to debate against other parties, including UKIP, if the BNP were not present.

In fact, Glyn Ford then challenged the Liberal Democrats to pull out, which they have done, and the Green Party likewise. Though Lib Dem Graham Watson apparently asked to sit in the audience as a candidate! Glyn Ford might be outside with a small anti-fascist protest group.

Based on the problems we had last time the BNP were in Bath, I hope the police will be notified. Good on Glyn for taking a stand too.

So the debate is currently between the Conservatives, the BNP and UKIP.

Spoilt for choice.

Numbers Show a Fourth Term for Labour

Labour could still win the next General Election. Despite poll woes, party troubles and policy mistakes, a Tory Government is no forgone conclusion. Though many are acting as if failure is inevitable, it is still possible for Labour to snatch victory from the (silver-spooned) jaws of defeat. Putting politics aside for the time being, statistics alone point to a fourth term.

Political geography favours Gordon Brown. If both major parties were to perform equally well at the election, Labour would still wins 80 more seats than the Tories. This means that David Cameron would have to win another two million votes to earn the same number of seats. To break even, the Tories require a 6% lead, and an even bigger 10% per cent to earn an overall working majority. This seems like a walkover considering the current double figure lead the Conservatives have at the moment, until you learn the history lesson that every government from the mid-50s to mid-90s that suffered difficulties half-way through the term enjoyed a significant poll recovery. It is highly likely that the Government will close the gap to avoid a wipeout, and there is enough time to tighten the race and prevent a 10-point lead, and perhaps catch-up enough to rob Cameron of the 6% benchmark

Although the label has been applied in many cases, Gordon Brown is not John Major. In the Crewe and Nantwich byelection, Labour lost 40% of its vote. Combined with the same result in Glasgow East, this seems devastating, and foreboding of things to come. That is, until it is compared to the Dudley West byelection in 1994, where the Conservative vote collapsed by a spectacular 80%.

Labour woes are fundamentally different, as Gordon Brown has been a fashionable scapegoat over the past year. The YouGov polling boss, Peter Kellner, presents research that shows that having dealt with floods and other horsemen (whose horses had foot-and-mouth or bluetongue), voters do not blame Brown for obviously international issues like rising food and fuel prices, but still want help from the government. So while the credit crunch is global, current economic problems contrast hugely with Black Wednesday, which was a fully-patented Tory disaster. It marked the beginning of the end for John Major, but Gordon Brown is in a very different position.

The double-figure Tory poll lead is incredibly overrated. All the hype about a landslide of Blairesque proportions is ridiculous as in 1995 and 1996 (the same sort of mid-term time scale befroe the election) Tony Blair earned extraordinary approval ratings which hit 70%. Factor in Cameron’s ratings, which occaisionaly stuggle 50%, and the scale of defeat fizzles out. It seems that while the Leader of the Opposition appears likeable, compassionate and competent, he is exposed as lightweight, shallow and very out-of-touch.

As Cameron is a poor impression of Tony Blair, he cannot win an election by himself. The Old School Tories of yesterdecade still frighten voters who can remember them (as a generation have grown up under Labour, which may explain why Brown’s history lessons of “15% interest rates” and “3 million unemployed” fail to resonate with everyone). Nevertheless, the Tory Party still appears unchanged and Tories still appear as untrustworthy crypto-thatcherites. Unfortunately for Cameron, he cannot even command a successful gagging order on his team, as Micheal Gove released plans to privatise education and the farcical David Davis byelection.

Essentially, the facts point to Brown winning, barely, though probably losing his majority. In the event of a hung parliament it is probably that Labour would remain the biggest party, but what would happen then is uncertain. Lib Dem Nick Clegg, a David Cameron impersonator by profession, has taken the Liberal Democrats to the right, and is likely to act as a Tory puppet. It all depends on Brown re-establishing Labour as the party of fairness on the way to economic recovery

Having been Chancellor for 10 years it seems logical that Gordon Brown is the best man to navigate Britain through turbulent financial waters, but even with the wind in his sails, the captain may well go down with the ship.