'La' Hain

[smithdown]

WELSH Secretary Peter Hain is to boycott the BBC’s flagship political debate programme Question Time over proposals to invite the British National Party to take part.

 

Mr Hain, a regular panellist on the weekly question-and-answer programme, last night urged other Cabinet ministers to follow his lead and decline to appear alongside BNP members.

 

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/welsh-po...91466-24629815/

 

bottling tart, he should go on and give them down the banks

[Knox_Harrington]

He's right to do so. The Tories and Lib Dems should follow suit. We've had this before. You batter them, they'll get sympathy. They pick up on an odd point they'll look informed. Whatever you do, they win. They gain either credibility or sympathy and the entire discussion with the mainstream politicians will be one where they will all repeatedly attack them, skewing the discussion and making it all about them. Again, sympathy.

[smithdown]

You think this doesn't get them sympathy?

[John am Rhein]

I'm all in favour of banning, excluding and generally persecuting the BNP whenever possible, but given the commonly held belief that they should be allowed to stand for election, why should they not be allowed to appear on Question Time?

[Knox_Harrington]

You think this doesn't get them sympathy?

Does get them a little but not credibility. Sharing a platform on the BBC's flagship political discussion show gets them credibility and sympathy. Credibility for doing it, sympathy after they get battered but maybe even more credibility. They then get their performance reviewed etc etc.

 

Just f*** them off.

[Knox_Harrington]

I'm all in favour of banning, excluding and generally persecuting the BNP whenever possible, but given the commonly held belief that they should be allowed to stand for election, why should they not be allowed to appear on Question Time?

Not commonly held by me.

Edited September 8, 2009 by Knox_Harrington

[smithdown]

Does get them a little but not credibility. Sharing a platform on the BBC's flagship political discussion show gets them credibility and sympathy. Credibility for doing it, sympathy after they get battered but maybe even more credibility. They then get their performance reviewed etc etc.

 

Just f*** them off.

 

Get one on and they won't be able to stop themselves from threatening to drown kids in the Med or some such madness

[Stevie H]

I'm all in favour of banning, excluding and generally persecuting the BNP whenever possible, but given the commonly held belief that they should be allowed to stand for election, why should they not be allowed to appear on Question Time?

they're inching their way to legitimacy as it is and an appearance on question time would be a massive endorsement of them as a genuine political party, which they're not. whoever they send on question time will be well trained and will trot out their scripted answers and not put his foot in it. they can only gain from it.

[Knox_Harrington]

Get one on and they won't be able to stop themselves from threatening to drown kids in the Med or some such madness

They haven't once been shown up like this on the BBC since this has started most recently. Why do think this will change now?

[matty]

You're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.

 

Banning political parties from elections, or television, or any other form of media is extremely problematic. How do you frame such rules? How do you define and demonstrate the holding of views which would make their participation in democracy undesirable? The BNP has become slightly more sophisticated in recent years, toning down the openly racist stuff, and that is working. Unfortunately, this renders it even more difficult to ban them, and they know that.

 

However, at heart, they remain exactly the same. The only thing to do then, regrettably, is to face them down. Give them enough rope...

[cymrococh]

I can see Hain's point, but I agree with matty.

 

Going on there with them is a great opportunity to show them up, if you don't fancy yourself against some BNP member then you can't be that much of a politician.

 

The audience isn't exactly going to back the c*nts.

[Gilps]

Fair play to Hain, I say.

 

Not sure the BBC has much choice, at least not without putting themselves into a very difficult position. However having senior politicians (ideally of all persuasions) publicly refusing to appear alongside them and explaining why is no bad thing.

[John am Rhein]

they're inching their way to legitimacy as it is and an appearance on question time would be a massive endorsement of them as a genuine political party, which they're not. whoever they send on question time will be well trained and will trot out their scripted answers and not put his foot in it. they can only gain from it.

 

All true. But on what grounds could the BBC justify excluding them given they are supposed to be impartial?

[John am Rhein]

Banning political parties from elections, or television, or any other form of media is extremely problematic. How do you frame such rules? How do you define and demonstrate the holding of views which would make their participation in democracy undesirable?

 

IMO, the way to do this is to have a constitution, certain core elements of which are explicitly stated to be inviolable, i.e. parties are not allowed to promote policies which, if enacted, would violate this core constitution.

[Bailo]

IMO, the way to do this is to have a constitution, certain core elements of which are explicitly stated to be inviolable, i.e. parties are not allowed to promote policies which, if enacted, would violate this core constitution.

Don't the BNP already violate European Law by preventing certain ethnic groups from joining? Has anything come of this, as I remember reading there was to be an investigation by the EU just after they won their Euro MP seats.

[Stevie H]

All true. But on what grounds could the BBC justify excluding them given they are supposed to be impartial?

the bbc could take a better stand than the current government has done and say that they break the law by their manifesto and policies inciting racial hatred. i think the bbc is in an unenviable position though and more should have been done to stop the bnp gaining legitimacy before now. they will go on question time and be cast as some pantomime baddie, which their supporters will love, and the other inneffectual politicians on the show will all try to score cheap personal points off them. some solidarity among the main parties, a unified approach to not recognising the bnp as a political party would help.

[Knox_Harrington]

some solidarity among the main parties, a unified approach to not recognising the bnp as a political party would help.

Yep. If they all refuse to share a platform they can't go on. Make it unacceptable to even look at them.

[matty]

IMO, the way to do this is to have a constitution, certain core elements of which are explicitly stated to be inviolable, i.e. parties are not allowed to promote policies which, if enacted, would violate this core constitution.

That would probably be an answer. Although defining those policies would be a lawyer's paradise. How would you judge whether Cameron's policies were anti-constitutional? We barely know what they are...

 

Yep. If they all refuse to share a platform they can't go on. Make it unacceptable to even look at them.

 

Which would appeal to their support probably - the kind of person who says 'they don't want to listen to people like me'.

[Knox_Harrington]

Which would appeal to their support probably - the kind of person who says 'they don't want to listen to people like me'.

Me and Des don't support the BNP.

[Des]

Get one on and they won't be able to stop themselves from threatening to drown kids in the Med or some such madness

 

Where does this idea that the more you exposure you give to the far right Nazis, the more likely they are to run into opposition because people can see what they're really like? This is patently untrue and in fact the complete opposite has been the case - Hitler didn't disappear into obscurity when he got wider exposure and Le Pen in France thrived on it. The Nazis aren't stupid, this is why they crave publicity and want their leaders to be in the media as much as possible. Engaging in normal debate with these c*nts only legitimises them and gives them an air of respectability. They should be given no platform and have as much right to be involved in normal political discourse as a Raping Women's Party would have.

[Stevie H]

Which would appeal to their support probably - the kind of person who says 'they don't want to listen to people like me'.

 

their support already exists though. increased legitimacy from appearances on platforms like question time can onlty convince a few floaters to convert to them. they can only win from it. they need to be f***ing demonised and ostracised, not legitimised.

[John am Rhein]

Don't the BNP already violate European Law by preventing certain ethnic groups from joining? Has anything come of this, as I remember reading there was to be an investigation by the EU just after they won their Euro MP seats.

 

I don't think anything has come of it...yet (?)

 

However, even if they are found to have broken the law, this wouldn't result in the being barred from future elections.

[Knox_Harrington]

Where does this idea that the more you exposure you give to the far right Nazis, the more likely they are to run into opposition because people can see what they're really like? This is patently untrue and in fact the complete opposite has been the case - Hitler didn't disappear into obscurity when he got wider exposure and Le Pen in France thrived on it. The Nazis aren't stupid, this is why they crave publicity and want their leaders to be in the media as much as possible. Engaging in normal debate with these c*nts only legitimises them and gives them an air of respectability. They should be given no platform and have as much right to be involved in normal political discourse as a Raping Women's Party would have.

Further to this, even if they are stupid (which I agree with you on, they aren't), there might be one or two with questionable views who are very savvy who can see that they could become a vehicle to something greater.

[John am Rhein]

That would probably be an answer. Although defining those policies would be a lawyer's paradise. How would you judge whether Cameron's policies were anti-constitutional? We barely know what they are...

 

Vagueness would be constitutional

[John am Rhein]

the bbc could take a better stand than the current government has done and say that they break the law by their manifesto and policies inciting racial hatred.

 

do they actually do this, though?

 

and would the BBC not end up in a position from which they could be succesfully sued?