Ready for change

The BNP on Question Time – What is OUR responsibility now?

 

I have to admit that I was unsure whether the appearance of Nick Griffin, Leader of the British National Party (BNP) would be a good or bad thing.  I didn’t know whether it would show his Party up to be the racist and homophobic group that I believe they clearly are or whether the publicity and his well-managed style would carry him through.

Watching the scenes outside BBC TV Centre on Wood Lane yesterday afternoon, I was in complete sympathy with the 500-1,000 protesters in their feeling of revulsion at the thought of this man being given such an airing on one of the UK’s most prominent, mainstream political programmes.  I understood the arguments put forward by them as well as by high profile politicians such as Diane Abbott MP and Peter Hain MP who objected to his presence on the show.  However, I am also an advocate of free speech and, as long as there isn’t incitement to hatred, believe that one of our greatest assets as a free country with a free people, is that individuals can express their own views and that they should be allowed to do so.  Therefore, I looked forward, although with serious trepidation, to seeing that particular broadcast of Question Time.

By the end of the show, I was left with a strong sense of relief that the show had gone ahead and that it had been so smoothly run.  I am glad that it went ahead in the format which it did and I believe that the net result is that the BNP were shown up for what they truly are – liars and bigots with no true foundations for any of their extreme beliefs or assertions.

Throughout the programme, Griffin was clearly nervous, with nervous smiles, continuous rubbing of his hands, shaking fingers and extremely defensive body language.  He stated that he had often been misquoted in the media but when challenged was unable to give ANY concrete examples of what was said and how he was misquoted.

I was most heartened to see that members of the panel came equipped with evidence of his and his Party’s previous actions and words, including knowledge of the time when he shared a platform with David Duke, then Head of the Ku Klux Klan, with James W Von Brunn, a white supremicist who killed a security guard in an attack on Washington’s Holocaust museum earlier this year, also present at the event.  As we all now know, Griffin was given a suspended sentence in 1998 for inciting race-hate after distributing holocaust denial literature.  Still, last night he smirked during the question about the horrors of the Second World War, with Dimbleby clearly rattled by this.  He labelled gay men ‘creepy’, stated that if Churchill were alive now he would join the BNP and denied saying that Hitler ‘went a bit too far’.  WHAT a grubby little man with grubby little views!

Nick Griffin and the BNP were last night exposed for what they are – an evil, racist and homophobic Party that does not stand up to scrutiny and, I believe, have no place in a modern, free and civilised society.  But we, whether as political campaigners or as ordinary decent people, have a duty to perform in the light of the recent electoral success of such a Party.   The lesson we MUST learn is that to effectively counter such extremists is by listening and responding to the complaints and worries of the people who vote for them.  It is often said that people who vote BNP do so as a protest.  It is therefore the responsibility of those of us who are mainstream politicians to ask people exactly what their concerns are and to find some way of addressing them.  We cannot afford to ignore the genuine concerns people have on the matter of immigration and we also cannot afford to allow people to feel sidelined from our political system.  Each of us has a duty to vote.  That in itself will stop extremists like the BNP from succeeding.  However, until people actually engage and feel properly engaged in the political system there will continue to be extremist groups that flourish as a result of the gaps left.  The BNP are not remotely British, be it in attitude, outlook, approach or substance.  They are an evil, racist and homophobic Party and our responsibility is to engage ordinary people on the doorsteps, effectively address their concerns, and thereby block the attainments of such extremists as the BNP, at the Ballot Box.

 

LGBTory and the Conservatives at Manchester Pride 2009

LGBTory Members before the Parade

This weekend saw another first for David Cameron’s modern Conservatives.  LGBTory, the Conservative Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans group, for the second year running took part in the celebrations of Manchester Pride – Manchester’s annual Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) festival, held over the August bank holiday weekend.  Not only did they have a stall throughout the whole of the Pride ‘Big Weekend’, the group also walked in the parade, with the now familiar rainbow tree logo and the slogan “Conservative and Proud”.  These efforts were to showcase the Conservatives as a Party interested in LGBT issues and in putting an end to homophobia and promoting equal rights for all, no matter what their sexual or gender identity.

The weekend was a tremendous success.  We had an excellent team in the parade and had loads of fun doing it.  We were flying the flag for the Conservatives and had lots of attention from the many thousands of people who lined the parade route through the city.

 Last year we had a stall at Manchester Pride for the first time ever and we built on that success this year with our presence in the parade too.  On the stall, we had a great deal of interest in both LGBTory and the Conservatives generally.  People were positive about us being there and were very happy to see us.

 

LGBTory stall at Manchester Pride

The successful Pride attendance follows news that a gay event is to be held at the party’s annual conference next month.  Conference Pride will be held at Spirit Bar in the heart of Manchester’s gay village on Tuesday October 6th.  Guests will include shadow equalities minister Theresa May, Conservative Party vice chair Margot James, Shadow Environment Secretary Nick Herbert, Chief Cxecutive of Stonewall Ben Summerskill and political blogger Iain Dale.

Royal Mail – To Privatise or not to Privatise?

Yesterday I sent a letter special delivery via Royal Mail.  I was given the option of the item having a guaranteed delivery by 9am or 1pm.  As the item needed to be in London by 12pm at the latest, I had little choice but to choose the delivery by 9am.  This was at a cost of £12.65.

I was given a tracking code number with which I could track the item’s progress across the country.  I was very impressed with this service and eagerly looked online this morning to see that my item had arrived.  All the webiste could tell me (and still can as I write) was that my item “is currently progressing through our network”.  Considering that the item was supposed to be delivered, I can only imagine that this either illustrates that my item either hasn’t arrived at the time agreed or that the IT systems of the Royal Mail cannot cope with this tracking device.

I personally have had so many bad experiences with Royal Mail, whether through lost letters and parcels (which is, incidentally, infuriatingly common in city centre apartment delivery, where I live) or by the treatment one gets in many Post Offices and Parcel Force depots up and down the country.  Now, I don’t wish to make sweeping generalisations as I know that there are many dedicated Royal Mail staff to whom this wouldn’t apply.  However, the service offered by Royal Mail and the Post Office certainly does leave an awful lot to be desired in many instances.

When the privatisation of the Royal Mail was originally suggested in the time of John Major’s premiership, I personally was totally against the loss of a national institution bearing the Crown from state ownership.  However, in 2009, seeing how efficiently the private competitors often operate and when I see the often poor service from this state-owned business, I think that a rethink of some description is definitely needed for the future.

Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi Disgrace

 

Convicted Terrorist Megrahi

Yesterday saw the ‘Scottish Government’ led by the SNP, defeated in a vote in the Scottish Parliament by 73 votes to 50.  Ministers in Scotland sought approval that the decision to release the convicted terrorist was “consistent with the principles of justice’.  Thank goodness for at least SOME common sense and sense of justice being shown in the Scottish Parliament.

What a sad day it was when the eyes of the world were upon our nation and we let down the free world by releasing a convicted murderer back to his homeland simply because he was terminally ill.

I do have sympathy for the fact that the man was ill.  But it is a disgrace that a man who cold-bloodedly murdered 270 people should be allowed out when those people who died were not shown any sympathy from him as he was plotting to kill them all and managed it.

It took long enough to bring him to justice as it was. Yes, he should have been given the comforts a dying man needs but kept in prison until he had served his term or died, whichever came first.

The Scottish Government has a lot to answer for in this whole sorry affair and this decision, whether influenced by Number 10 or not, reflects badly on the Labour Government in London as it was they who introduced the devolution of these powers which would have otherwise remained with the Home Office in London, a body more experienced at taking decisions of such magnitude.

I certainly think that there should be an inquiry, as a matter of urgency, to look into all discussions between the UK and Libya about the Megrahi case, including Tony Blair’s meeting with Colonel Gadaffi in 2007 and Bill Rammell’s visit to Libya in February.

The entire system of justice in Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole has been brought into disrepute as a result of the actions of a few individuals and an episode like this must not be allowed to happen ever again.

LGBT Issues and the European Elections 2009

I recently read a news item on the Lesbian and Gay Foundation’s (LGF) website about the Euro Elections this year.  As are many people, the LGF were particularly concerned about the rise of extreme Parties in elections across the UK.  Each of the main parties were highlighted and given the chance to air their views about why they think people should vote in the Euro elections and why they should consider voting for their Party.

I was a little disappointed that the author of the article had not been able to contact someone from the Conservatives to enable the Party to comment on this as they seemed to have been able to contact everyone else.  But when I made contact I was very pleased that the LGF were willing to take a comment from me on the subject.

For the benefit of any other people who may read this and would like to know about LGBT issues and the Conservatives, especially in the run-up to the European elections on 4 June, this is what I said:

1.              Why is voting in the European elections so important?

There is so more in modern Britain that unites us, regardless of Party politics, than divides us.  As Conservatives, we urge everyone to use their votes on Thursday 4 June to reject the politics of hate and extremism, and to elect MEPs who reflect the diversity of the North West.

2.              Why should LGBT people vote for the Conservatives?

The Conservative Party today is a modern, dynamic, forward-looking Party.  We are recruiting and promoting from a diverse range of people, communities and interests.  Among the Party and the Shadow Cabinet are Margot James, Vice Chair responsible for women’s issues; Nick Herbert, Shadow Secretary for the Environment and Alan Duncan, Shadow Leader of the House of Commons.  Apart from the fact these people are leading Conservatives, they also have one other thing in common.  They are gay.  The Conservatives are in touch with Britain as it is today.

By ensuring that the Party is run by people, drawn from across society, we can make sure that never again are sections of society marginalised or neglected from what we do.

We supported civil partnership legislation and we backed plans to crack down on homophobic bullying. We also gave strong backing to action on hate crimes in the Criminal Justice Act.

Two years ago, it was a Conservative MEP who launched the written declaration on homophobic bullying in schools to the European Parliament’s Gay and Lesbian Rights Intergroup.

3.              Other comments and response to the Green representatives comments (who highlighted a possible link between the Conservatives and various other Parties across Europe.

Despite all the laws and much progress over recent years, a poll in the Observer found that 24 per cent of the public think that gay sex should be made illegal. Nine years after the age of consent was equalised, and four years after civil partnerships were introduced, a quarter of the British public want to reverse these changes and take us back to the situation that existed before the 1967 Sexual Offences Act.

This shows why continued work by all of us, in all mainstream parties, is so important.  Legislation may change behaviour, but it may not always be enough to change attitudes.  Only by showing what we all have in common can we reach a situation where extremism and division cannot thrive and where we are all treated fairly, with dignity and respect.

That also means we must be consistent in what we say, regardless of who we are talking to or where that discussion takes place.

That’s why the Conservative MEPs elected on June 4 will not sit as part of a group with MEPs from other countries who do not share our view on the way Europe should be run.  We will not speak up for Britain’s rights when in Britain only to then vote against Britain’s interests when sitting in the European Parliament.   Between now and then, we will be meeting with like-minded MEPs to form a new group and we have stated that this will NOT INCLUDE any group with racist or homophobic members.

In the North West, last May across Greater Manchester, we received more votes than Labour.  We have LGBT councillors and candidates across the region and our new branch of LGBTory is going from strength to strength, not least with the fantastic support we received at last year’s Manchester Pride.

Dad’s nose, Mum’s eyes, Gordon Brown’s Debt

Congestion Charge Dismissed by 79% of voters!

I was watching the results come in on Friday lunchtime and couldn’t quite believe my ears.  I’d been campaigning against the Congestion Charge proposal for weeks and seen the vast opposition to such an extra tax on drivers from all sections of the community – including young and old, retired and working, in more than one borough of the Greater Manchester area.  I didn’t for one minute think that it would get the go ahead as a result of speaking to so many different people over several weeks.  However, even I did not expect the result to be as dramatic as it turned out to be!

79% of people across the ten boroughs voted against the proposals with

EVERY BOROUGH VOTING NO!

The full results were as follows:

Bury: Yes = 20,529 (21%) No = 76,910 (79%)
Bolton: Yes = 16,563 (21%) No = 64,001 (79%)
Manchester: Yes = 43,593 (28%) No = 113,064 (72%)
Oldham: Yes = 17,571 (20%) No = 68,884 (80%)
Rochdale: Yes = 17,333 (22%) No = 61,686 (78%)
Salford: Yes = 14,603 (16%) No = 79,326 (84%)
Stockport: Yes: 24,090 (19%) No = 103,706 (81%)
Tameside: Yes = 16,323 (17%) No = 83,105 (83%)
Trafford: Yes = 20,445 (20%) No = 83,568 (80%)
Wigan: Yes = 27,810 (26%) No = 78,565 (76%)

In short, this poll was a victory for common sense and an illustration of democracy in action in our country.  The People were given a straightforward question – Would you like to see more taxation?  They said NO!  Yes, give us the improvements in public transport but don’t tax car users even more for that!  After all, what seems to have been forgotten in many quarters of this debate is that the money to finish the tram extensions was left in the pot by the outgoing Conservative Government when Labour gained power in 1997.  However, as the new Government did nothing with it, the costs spiralled until there wasn’t enough money to finish the project.

So, the question is what now for Manchester?  As a result of the blinkered attitude of Manchester City Council, GMPTE and others involved in this bid, it is back to the drawing board.  If other ideas had been seriously considered alongside the congestion charge scheme we may have had a ‘Plan B’, but as they didn’t even think it worth coming up with alternative plans, it’s now necesary to start again from scratch.  Good representation of the People of Greater Manchester?  I think not!

Arrest of Damian Green MP

Innocent MP arrested for doing his job!  ie Holding the Government to account.  How much further is this nation going to descend towards a quasi-Stalinist dictatorship under this Labour Government?

My Debt to Labour