October 19, 2009
Peter Hain’s Bad Idea
Peter Hain apparently thinks it’s a good idea to try and pressure the BBC into dis-inviting Nick Griffin from appearing on Question Time, by threatening legal action on the tenuous grounds that the BNP is an “unlawful body”.
This is not a good idea. The BNP thrives on its status as outsider under-dog, fighting the liberal elites that exist solely to suppress the rights of British whites. (Quite why the “left fascist” elites do this, nobody is sure. But it has something to do with “political correctness gone mad”, and that old bogeyman, “multiculturalism”).
If the government were to prevent Griffin appearing on QT, this would be a BNP-boon. Griffin would get even more media coverage than he will just from appearing on QT, and would appear to have genuine evidence for his claims about conspiracy. The BNP already alleges that the BBC is part of a “far left” plot against them. If adopted, Hain’s suggestions would only add fuel to the fire.
Hain’s strategy would also be an enormous snub to the just-under-a-million people who voted BNP last June in free, fair, democratic elections. Hardly a way to endear those people to mainstream politics. And it would also put the BBC in something of a dilemma (and I’m not sure how easily it could be solved): if the BNP are banned for being “unlawful”, but have two MEPs and many councillors, what does that mean for the BBC’s constitutional impartiality? I predict that if put in such a situation, the BBC would either stick by impartiality and be accused of aiding and abetting an illegal fascist organisation, or choose to abandon impartiality. Either way, it’s free ammunition for the Beeb’s enemies at the Daily Mail and the Murdoch empire. Who, we might all remember, like to push news and comment which – whilst officially denouncing the BNP – has frequently been pro-BNP in all but name.
Sadly, this government already thinks that the BNP can be tackled by legal harrasment: that’s why they are taking the BNP to court over its whites-only membership policy. As though forcing the BNP to legally accept non-whites will somehow stop it being a racist organisation (and one questions the brainpower of any politician who thinks a de jure change in the BNP constitution will affect any sort of de facto one). The other argument for this – that it will put public pressure on the BNP and expose their racism – is a bad one too: all it will achieve is bucket loads of media coverage for Griffin that he wouldn’t previously have had, and lots of opportunities for him to claim his party stands up for the “indigenous white population” whilst telling lies about the National Black Police Officers’ Association. And let’s not live in the fantasy land that Griffin’s lies will be necessarily challenged and refuted, after the pathetic performances by the likes of Andrew Marr and Jeremy Paxman.
The facts on the ground are these: the BBC has to invite somebody from the BNP to appear on Question Time due to its constitutional requirement of impartiality. Question Time is a terrible format for exposing Griffin. Nonetheless, given that Griffin will appear, the best thing to do is offer as strenuous and powerful a condemnation of his views on air possible (though given the QT panel, that’s probably not going to happen). Apart from that, the most sensible thing to do is give the BNP as little attention as possible. Legal threats to the BBC will only generate media coverage for the BNP it wouldn’t otherwise have had, which means more opportunities for Griffin to spout lies and conspiracy. In short: gifting oxygen to a small fire, only to make it needlessly bigger.
–
In other news, it looks like we need to add Step 6 to the dummies’ guide to making excuses for your nasty friends: editing wikipedia to try and cover-up about their horrible neo-nazi pasts, whilst painting your former MEPs’ as extremist Europhiles!
Oh, and David Mitchell remains one of the best political commentators in the nation.
Frank said,
October 19, 2009 at 4:43 pm
You say “if the government were to prevent Griffin appearing on QT, this would be a BNP-boon.” Peter Hain has already handed them a publicity coup on a plate. Just read the comments on any the papers’ articles on his bad idea. Every time the government or the press propose muzzling the BNP they generate a wave of sympathy if not support for the BNP. Do they really think that the British public appreciate being treated like infants who need to be protected from hearing what nasty people have to say?
Paul Sagar said,
October 19, 2009 at 4:46 pm
“Peter Hain has already handed them a publicity coup on a plate.”
Yes, you are right, he has.
“Do they really think that the British public appreciate being treated like infants who need to be protected from hearing what nasty people have to say?”
No, I do not. In fact, I say as much in my original piece.