The BNP: why did they gain two MEPs?

Everyone’s talking about it, so I’ll put in my tuppence worth. 

The BNP won two seats in the European parliament.  Britain has not become enthralled with fascist politics.  In fact, Iwould argue that the strong support for anti-EU parties and the centre-right shows the exact opposite.  The British want to have more say over their own affairs – as individuals, at the local level and at the national level. 

So why did the BNP gain two seats?  Yes, partly it is a protest vote, and people feel emboldened to make protest votes iin elections that apparentely don’t matter (or at least not as much as a general election).  It is a ‘safe’ protest vote.  Some people will have voted BNP in this latest election who will revert to Labour or whomever in a general election.

A more worrying reason is the collapse of Labour support in their traditional heartlands.  Governments have a natural lifespan and towards the end of one – as with Labour today – we would expect to see the floating voters and fairweather fans drift in the direction of the opposition.  This is happening, but so is something else.  Labour’s core vote is wavering.  Some of these people are voting BNP.  And why not?  On the surface of things the BNP has much in common with the far-left.  But it combines its left-wing anti-privatisation planks with anti-immigrant rhetoric, the topic of immigration being one of great importance to many working class people who, rightly or wrongly, believe that our current immigration polcies have a negative effect on them.  The unwillingness of the Labour Party to discuss this issue and brand those who do as racist, plays into working class fears and the hands of the BNP.  The argument can be made: ‘if immigration is so good, why can’t we discuss it?  What have you got to hide?’   And the BNP can say they aren’t afraid to stick up for the working class – and that it is their willingness to discuss these ideas which have them branded ‘racist’.  And so ordinary people who feel concerned their worries are being stifled and those who are genuinely racist are lumped together.

Which leads nicely onto my next point.  The majority of the political parties are unwilling to share a platform with the BNP – even to debate them.  This is wrong.  In a democracy you do not silence those you disagree with (ahem, Ms Smith – Michael Savage?) you need to show why you are right and they are wrong.  With the BNP is remarkably easy- just ask them a few simple questions about race, about Jews and the holocaust – you don’t even need to go anywhere near the nitty gritty of what a BNP government would be like – and their support would plummet.  Yes, some people would still vote for them; but I bet that those people who voted BNP on the back of some nostalgia for a post-WWII Britain and a bit of pride in Britishness and some belief that this party was for the average working class man or woman, would have their eyes opened as to who the BNP really are.

My final point on why people may have been or may be, attracted to the BNP is quite simple reverse psychology.  The various powers that be were aghast that people may vote BNP, and told them not to.  So they did vote BNP.  It is particularly galling to listen to Labour MPs who are on the ropes, desperately trying to cling to power by invoking the bogeyman of BNP.  ‘If  you don’t vote for me, the BNP will get it!’ 

If you are interested, I was!, the Guardian asked a number of leading historians their opinions on whether or not we should be worried about the rise of the BNP (and whether it is really a rise at all):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-right

 

European Elections: Congratulations…

So, the results are in and they are a mixed bag. 

The Tories did about as well as they would have expected.  They improved slightly, but not spectacularly as a number of potential (or even regular) Tory voters will have voted for UKIP. 

Onto UKIP – I think they were the big winners on the night, but I doubt this will translate into general elections gains.  Many of these voters will vote Conservative in the general election, if not to support the Tories, then to ward off the lingering threat of a LibLab coalition keeping the Tories from power and taking us further into Europe.

The other smaller party grabbing headlines, the BNP, did well in terms of gaining two seats – but this wasn’t quite the level of success touted in the previous weeks (talk of 6-12 seats).  The BNP’s gains can largely be attributed to Labour’s failure – it was the Labour heartlands that saw the BNP sneak in. 

The Labour Party has to face the facts that they are losing ground amongst white, working class, males – and why shouldn’t theybe losing this voter group?  Labour MPs often give off the impression that much of Britain’s problems come from this group – or from white, middle class, males.  Or worse – they ignore white, working class, men completely.  Whilst the Labour Party bickers over expenses and Brown’s lack of charisma, they should be homing in on this group and addressing some of the problems here.  If Labour believes that the present level of immigration is perfectly fine, then they need to tell this group why that is the case.  If they do not, they need to do something about it.  They ought to tackle these issues head on as, unlike UKIP, the BNP may well be a factor in a general election; and the Labour Party needs white, working class, male votes.

The Liberal Democrats are not going to pick up this section of voters – what can the Liberal Democrats possibly offer them, PR?   Ha!  The Liberal Democrats seem to be facing their own problems in terms of vote share – those who would normally have voted LibDem seem to be drifting towards the Green Party.  The Greens gained quite an impressive vote share, but only picked up 2 MEPs; like the LibDems they too would like to implement a PR system and it is easy to see why a section of traditional LibDem voters would be quite at home with Caroline Lucas et al.  The LibDems may not lose out to the Greens at a general election – but the local council results showed large patches of blue in formally yellow blocs.  I guess Clegg isn’t enough to appeal to those who may swing Conservative, but perhaps he puts off LibDems who may vote Green?

 

Local elections: Labour losses, Tory gains

Seems like great news from the Motherland.  The results are coming in as I type, and a quick glance at an electoral map shows  the local councils are turning a beautiful shade of blue.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/elections/local_council/09/map/html/map.stm

A flood of votes away from Labour is no real surprise.  What is of interest to me is the response by the Labour party. Also curious is the LibDem vote, or the lack thereof.

In recent days both Hazel Blears and Jacqui Smith (famous on this side of the pond for her refusal to grant Michael Savage entry to the UK, not the he wanted to come over or anything, but -you know – if he did, he wouldn’t be allowed.  Oh, thank-you Jacqui for protecting us British from the rants of someone we have never heard of and don’t care about, but will now seek out online to see what the fuss is about) have resigned their cabinet posts.  Jacqui Smith left due to criticism over her general ineptness, but also her somewhat fruity expenses; Hazel Blears’s expenses also forced her out, but her quite public differences of opinion with Gordon Brown (he thinks he’s pretty good, she does not) would have done for her anyway.  

The two women have been followed in the last 24 hours by James Purnell and John Hutton.  Purnell’s dramatic exit as the polls closed was somewhat predicted:  we knew someone was going, but their identity was guess work.  His was supposedly, doubtless in his mind anyway, to precipitate a rush of colleagues who would similarly declare that they were resigning for the good of the party and that Gordon should too.  Well, like the previous attempted ‘coups’ it has fizzled out.  Hutton did indeed follow – but he declared his support for Brown as he did so.  Purnell’s friends, ie David Miliband,  have reaffirmed their loyalty to the PM.  Whoops!

So, Gordon is safe to limp on for the time being.

And the reaction to the local elections?   Dawn Primarolo has given us her interpretation of the results:

  “[It] is clearly disappointing, lots of good Labour councillors have lost their seats. It’s undeniable that the voters are angry and it focused around the issues at Westminster and MPs expenses. “

Hmmm.  Unless by “issues at Westminster”  she means the dogged refusal to call an election, then she is slightly wide of the mark.  What about these issues:  ID cards, standards in education, bizarre political correctness campaigns, the economy, the Lisbon Treaty, the encroachment of the nanny state … and so forth?

And so to the LibDems.  From the results so far it (and they are by no means all in) it appears that although they have taken seats from Labour, they have also lost out to the Tory resurgence.  As the LibDems are the tradtional ‘protest vote’ this is very interesting should it continue.  It would appear that the protest voters have either protested by abstaining or by voting independent.  The latter is evident as the independent share of the vote has risen, the former is more difficult to judge. 

Is this a sign that the country is in favour of the Conservatives as opposed to merely disliking Labour?  We shall wait and see!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/local-elections/5447195/Local-elections-2009-results-live-blog.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/elections/article6435563.ece