By Andrew Brons. When I was asked to take part in the programme, I explained that our Party was only a fledgling organisation that was only going to dip its toe in the water of the county council elections. They tried the MEP flattery tactic, implying that my election (from the top of a list) had turned me into some sort of senior statesman. I explained that probably fewer than one in a hundred of our voters had even heard my name prior to the European Elections. It was then that I heard that the surviving Chairman of the Rump BNP had refused to take part. I realised that somebody had to speak up for the Nationalist cause and that I had to be that somebody.
As expected, I did not only have to refute the assertions of Mrs. Hodge, Labour MP for Barking, horny-handed proletarian and scion of that well known diamond mining family (headed by Harry Hodge?). I also had to deal with the claims of Mr. Paxperson and those contained in the opening film.
The central argument of all three was that support for Nationalism in general and of the BNP in particular had evaporated autonomously in 2010 and that UKIP had gallantly agreed to fill the vacuum. The BNP’s electoral demise had, it was claimed, caused the Party to fragment.
I pointed out that that the causal connection was the other way around. The fragmentation had caused a depletion of activists, which had led to electoral setbacks. That fragmentation had been caused by the BNP leadership’s paranoid and repressive actions against those who in 2010 had sought to have the BNP leader replaced. One of the grounds for that leadership challenge was that the 2010 results were ‘disappointing’. I did not agree with their assessment of the 2010 General Election but I respected their right to hold it.
I pointed out that the 2010 results – both in the General Election and in the local elections – were not particularly disappointing. The support for all small parties was smaller than for those same parties in the European elections. The BNP’s average vote per constituency was 1673 votes compared with 1665 for UKIP and only 918 for the Green Party.
Mrs. Diamond-Mine tried to claim that the BNP’s loss of its twelve councillors in Barking was the result of a collapse in electoral support. I had to explain to Mrs.D-M as slowly as I could (so that even she could understand), that the loss was attributable to the fact that the local elections in 2010 (unlike those held in 2006) coincided with the General Election, so that instead of 30% or so people voting, that percentage rose to 65 or 70% in 2010. It was not that the BNP’s votes fell but that those votes were swamped by the votes of people who did not usually vote in local elections. In fact in Morley, Leeds, support for the BNP’s sitting councillor rose by two hundred but he still lost his seat.
They tried to claim that UKIP’s support had eclipsed support for the BNP (and other Nationalists) because UKIP was ‘respectable’(a euphemism for lacking any kind of principle or even belief) and not ‘racist’ (undefined) but only ‘xenophobic’. Well that’s all right then!
I had to point out that UKIP’s rise in electoral support was attributable to the BNP’s fragmentation and to the shameless media promotion of UKIP in general and Farage in particular. I reminded viewers that Farage had appeared on the BBC’s Question Time more than any other politician.
The Holocaust had its usual cameo role. Mrs. D-M clearly thought that the county council elections were not about education, highways and structure plans but about the history of the second world war. I disabused her of that belief and said that political parties do not usually make historical pronouncements. I am happy to leave history to the historians. I could have added, “provided that they are not historians in totalitarian countries in which they are instructed as to what their conclusions must be”.
She brought in the usual accusations of fascism but I was pleased to point out that it was the Labour Party’s treatment of Nationalists that was fascistic.
Mrs. D-M ended the programme by asking me if I still believed in eating black babies for breakfast or something like that. I told her that I was not going to allow her to put words (or black babies for that matter) into my mouth. I told her that our policies were there to be seen in our policy statement. Before I could answer her question fully, Mr. Paxperson brought the exchange (and the programme) to an end.
What did my appearance on the programme achieve? It presented me as the spokesman for British Nationalism and it provided some national publicity for our party. It allowed me to refute the claim that there had been an autonomous fall in support for Nationalism and rise in support for UKIP. However, above all, it allowed me the opportunity to have another public spat with that defender of the poor, Mrs. Diamond-Mine. The last had been in 2009.
The programme can be view at the link below. Andrew is on at 35 mins and 46 seconds in.