Battle for Barking - Margaret Hodge

The video above shows just how far Labour will go in their quest to rid the UK of the British National Party.

Taken from last night's More4 programme, Battle for Barking, Margaret Hodge is shown spewing lies to the non-white communities in order to gain their vote.

Watch it and weep as her hatred spews forth.

The full two hour Battle for Barking programme can be viewed HERE

A special thanks to the director of the programme, Laura Fairrie, for creating an unbiased account of the British National Party's campaign.

42 BNP Parliamentary Seats: What a Party List PR Election Would Mean

The BNP would currently have at least 42 Westminster parliamentary seats if Britain had a Party List Proportional Representation system of elections and would be one of the leading nationalist parties in Western Europe.

This simple fact is obvious from a straight analysis of election figures which I was prompted into undertaking after seeing the following ignorant remark made on the BDF forum by “Reform Group” activist Tony Ward:

[QUOTE=L= (1/2) d v2 s CL]The ineptitude of the BNP to seize the moment in what was for us a perfect storm raised my suspicions a long time ago. The dramatic rise of the right all across Europe in countries traditionally far more liberal than the UK, while we plummet to the bottom of the polls in what should have been our moment.

Is Nick Griffin state? I don't know but I will say it took someone of great skill to guide us through the last election and skilfully avoid success at every opportunity and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory; even the most inept would be incapable of such good fortune![/QUOTE]

In many ways, this remark sums up why those individuals have utterly failed in their attempts to seize control of the BNP: because they simply get the most basic of facts wrong, time and time again.

There are two obvious flaws in this argument:

1. The difference in voting systems between Britain and the rest of Europe which has allowed the “right wing” to take seats in the national parliaments on the continent; and

2. The reality is that most of these parties to which Mr Ward refers are UKIP-allied civic nationalists.

To elaborate further, and because Mr Ward’s apparent ignorance warrants it, I will first explain the different voting systems.

In all but one – France – of the European nations there is have a proportional representation list system of elections.

A party list system works like this: voters vote for a list, not a candidate. Each party is allocated seats in proportion to the number of votes it receives, using the party-determined ranking order.

This was precisely how the BNP got members elected to the European Parliament.

The nations which have list systems are as follows:

Austria; Belgium; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; Iceland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Luxembourg; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Russia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; and Switzerland.

Nations which have mixed systems are:

Germany - Mixed member proportional (which are a mixture of a proportional system and a single seat district system);

Hungary - Mixed Member Majoritarian (which are a mixture of a proportional system and a straight first past the post system, much like regional elections in Scotland and Wales); and

Ireland - Single Transferable Vote (A complex system where each constituency elects two or more representatives and voters rank some or all candidates in order of their choice. A successful candidate must achieve a quota, which is "calculated by dividing the Total Valid Poll by one more than the number of seats to be filled, ignoring any remainder and then adding 1 vote. One could argue, only the Irish, but the system is also used in local elections in Scotland and Wales.)

The nations which do not have party list systems are as follows:

Britain: First past the post.

France: First past the post with first round runoff. This means that if a single candidate fails to gain a majority of votes, a second round of voting takes place in which only candidates who achieved above a certain percentage are allowed to take part. The idea is to force voters to select a candidate who will take an outright majority of votes.

Now, what effect do these voting systems have?

Obviously, the countries with “pure” list systems of PR automatically make it easier for smaller parties to gain representation, while at the opposite end of the scale (in Britain and France,) it is near enough impossible for smaller parties to break into parliament.

This is why it appears that the “right wing” parties in those list system PR nations appear to be doing so well, and why in Britain and France the BNP and the Front National have no parliamentary representation.

It is thus an utterly flawed argument and comparison by Tony Ward to ascribe the BNP’s failure to reach into national parliamentary politics to the party’s “image.”

Quite simply, that argument smacks of ignorance and desperation.

In fact, if Britain did have a list PR system like other European countries, the BNP would already have significant representation in parliament.

Consider two scenarios:

Firstly, what the last General Election results would have translated to in terms of Westminster seats had the election been fought on a list PR system; and

Secondly, what those results would have been if the results were adjusted to allow the entire country an opportunity to vote for the BNP (as they obviously were not at the last election, because the BNP only stood in half the number of available seats).

First Scenario: The Last General Election Results

The actual results of the last General Election were as follows:

Conservative

Number of seats contested: 631

36.1% of the vote

10,703,754 votes

Labour

Number of seats contested: 631

29.0% of the vote

8,609,527 votes

Liberal Democrat

Number of seats contested: 631

23.0% of the vote

6,836,824 votes

UKIP

Number of seats contested: 572

3.1% of the vote

920,334 votes

BNP

Number of seats contested: 338

1.9% of the vote

563,743 votes

SNP

Number of seats contested: 59

1.7% of the vote

491,386 votes

Green

Number of seats contested: 310

1.0% of the vote

285,616 votes

Sinn Féin

Number of seats contested: 17

0.6% of the vote

171,942 votes

Democratic Unionist

Number of seats contested: 16

0.6% of the vote

168,216 votes

Plaid Cymru

Number of seats contested: 40

0.6 % of the vote

165,394 votes

SDLP

Number of seats contested: 18

0.4 % of the vote

110,970 votes

Conservatives and Unionists

Number of seats contested: 17

0.3 % of the vote

102,361 votes

Working on the basis that there are currently 650 seats in the House of Commons, these results would translate to a Party List-elected Parliament in Westminster as follows:

Conservatives: 235 seats

Labour: 189 seats

Liberal Democrats: 150 seats

UKIP: 20 seats

BNP: 12 seats

SNP: 11 seats

Greens: 7 seats

(All figures rounded off).

From that, it is obvious just how flawed Tony Ward’s argument is.

However, that is not even the full picture.

In a proper Party List PR system, the entire country gets the chance to vote for a party, as happened during the European Parliamentary elections in June 2009.

Second Scenario: General Election Figures Adjusted if the BNP Had Stood Nationally

As BNP voters are probably the most determined and motivated voters in the country, it is fair to assume that at least the same number who voted for the party nationally in the June 2009 European Parliamentary elections, would have voted BNP once again if given the opportunity in a General Election.

Of course, they were not, as the BNP only stood in half the available seats. As a result, the total brought out BNP vote in the last General Election was smaller than in the June 2009 Euro Election.

The BNP polled 943,598 votes in the European Election of June 2009, or 6.2 % of the vote.

Assuming that this vote would have stayed intact had the entire country been given the opportunity to vote BNP again in a Party List General Election, this would have meant that the BNP would now have 42 seats at Westminster.

The BNP vote actually increased by 1.2% in the General Election compared to the last result, so it is tempting to say that the BNP would have actually been more, but that is speculation.

One interesting fact about the European Parliamentary elections is that UKIP polled an impressive 2,498,226 or 16.5% of the vote in June 2009.

The bad news for UKIP is, however, that although they stood in almost the entire country again in the last General Election, and therefore the “can’t vote” argument is not valid, their vote did not hold up at all and crashed by around 1.5 million.

This is, of course a reflection of the fact that UKIP is in reality a one-issue civic nationalist Tory splinter group, rather than a real party. One could speculate if their vote would have held in a PR election, but given the nature of that party and the fact that they did stand nearly everywhere in the General Election, it is unlikely.

Which brings me on to the last point, namely the civic nationalist nature of many of these European “right wing” parties.

Mr Ward has obviously been taken in by the recent media hype over “right wing advances” in Europe and is obviously heading in the direction currently in vogue amongst many in the “Reform Group” to start a new party.

In fact, Mr Ward goes on in his BDF post to say:

[QUOTE=L= (1/2) d v2 s CL] We could start a new party along the lines of the PVV in Holland who went from nothing to 15% of the vote in five years, how did they do it?[/QUOTE]

Therein lies the crunch: the PVV (Geert Wilders’s party) is a civic nationalist organisation, in formal alliance with UKIP in the European Parliament.

Actually, the PVV is not even a party, which reveals even more about Mr Ward’s ignorance. The PVV is the name under which a privately incorporated association called the Stichting Groep is run – and Geert Wilders is its sole member.

But that aside, the PVV, just like the Swedish Democrats, are in reality civic nationalists like UKIP.

Is it possible that the “Reform Group” wants to form a UKIP-style civic nationalist party?

Possibly.

But then they would probably be better off joining UKIP which at least has an established base, rather than trying to do it from scratch.

And, of course, it would really help if stopped getting even the most simplest of facts wrong.

Article by Professor Plonk

BNP vote is up!

I am sick and tired of left-wing loonies saying the BNP is dead and buried when in fact the opposite is true.

Here are a few facts for you:

- In 1983, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 14,000 votes.

- In 1987, the BNP fought 2 seats and polled 563 votes.

- In 1992, the BNP fought 13 seats and polled 7,000 votes.

- In 1997, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 35,000 votes.

- In 2001, the BNP fought 33 seats and polled 47,000 votes.

- In 2005, the BNP fought 117 seats and polled 192,746 votes.

- In 2010, the BNP fought 339 seats and polled 563,743 votes.

As you can see from the General Election results the BNP vote is up 1.2% which was no mean feat seeing as most people wanted Labour out meaning they chose to vote Conservative.

Did you vote for your party or did you choose to vote tactically?

I can tell you one thing. Last year, when there was no BNP candidate in our local election, I didn't spoil my vote. I voted Conservative. It was a tactical vote which worked, just as this years tactical votes worked.

Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

A message from our chairman Mr Nick Griffin

Dear Fellow Patriot,

I appreciate that everybody is feeling very tired after this bruising campaign and some disappointing headline results. In fact, as you will see later in this message, behind the media's sneers, there is real concern about the progress that we have made in this extraordinarily hard-fought contest.

With the result now in, Britain faces its first "hung parliament" since 1974 and the next Government - if there is to be one and not a new election in a few months' time - will be a coalition of two of the main parties.

Ironically, this provides the British National Party (which spectacularly almost tripled its vote from 2005, jumping from 192,746 to a healthy 563,743 in yesterday's contest) with its best window of opportunity yet.

The kingmaker in any coalition will be the Liberal Democrats under Nick Clegg. Their key demand for participation in a coalition is electoral reform, and in particular the abolition of the current "first-past-the-post" election system. The reason why the Liberal Democrats oppose the first-past-the-post system is that it clearly puts a smaller party (which is what the Liberal Democrats are) at a hugely unfair disadvantage.

The figures tell the story: yesterday the Liberal Democrats won around 23 percent of the vote, but will end up with only 7 percent of the seats in Parliament. The BNP, which polled close to a million votes in June 2009, and over half a million yesterday (despite only fighting half of all the available 650 seats), will end up with no seats at all.

In effect, the first-past-the-post system simply throws millions of votes onto the rubbish heap where they are ignored. As a result, the Liberal Democrats have argued for the introduction of proportional representation (PR) in Britain.

Under a PR system, if a party gets 10 percent of the votes, it gets 10 percent of the seats in Parliament. If it gets 32 percent of the vote, it gets 32 percent of the seats, and so on.

It is an obviously fairer way of allowing all votes cast in an election be reflected in Parliament. In fact, a slightly amended system of PR is used in European Parliamentary elections, which allowed the BNP to win its two seats in that body in June 2009.

If the Liberal Democrats are involved in a coalition with either Labour or Conservatives, it is inevitable that they will set the demand for a PR system as one of the preconditions for their cooperation.

In fact, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has already made this demand in public - and both Labour and Conservatives have announced their willingness to consider it or, at the very least, hold a referendum on the topic.

What does this mean for the BNP? The tripling of the BNP vote on 6 May has some important implications.

Firstly, where we went head-to-head with UKIP and the Greens, we thrashed them. We outvoted UKIP in 178 seats and they beat us in 123. We outvoted the Greens in 134 seats for the Greens 23. UKIP had a huge budget and their campaign was backed by 13 MEPs, in it must not be forgotten that both UKIP and the Greens enjoy favourable treatment at the hands of the controlled media.

Secondly, while all minority parties were pushed out to the edge by the 'big boys', our vote not only held up but proportionately increased when compared to our June 2009 Euro election results.

When put into perspective, yesterday's result becomes even more interesting:

- In 1983, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 14,000 votes.

- In 1987, the BNP fought 2 seats and polled 563 votes.

- In 1992, the BNP fought 13 seats and polled 7,000 votes.

- In 1997, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 35,000 votes.

- In 2001, the BNP fought 33 seats and polled 47,000 votes.

- In 2005, the BNP fought 117 seats and polled 192,746 votes.

- In 2010, the BNP fought 339 seats and polled 563,743 votes.

Based on yesterday's impressive vote totals, the BNP would win in excess of 60 seats in Westminster under a PR system.

Some of the more perceptive Conservative journalists, such as Norman Tebbit, have already realised this as a possibility and have written about it in national newspapers.

In addition, many political commentators have already remarked that, on a night which saw all the smaller parties squeezed - including the Lib-Dems, who lost five seats - the strong showing and turnout of the BNP vote was "a source of great concern."

They have seen how the public hostility towards us is fast disappearing. I felt it on the streets and I'm sure you did too.

Compare this with a few years ago when we endured frequent confrontations and 'screamers'. This election we enjoyed a very friendly response on the streets and no aggravation (apart from the exception of activists from Labour's far left thuggish allies).

I have heard reports from all over the country, and have experienced it for myself, that the 'screamers' who used to pop out of the woodwork in almost every street, have all but completely vanished.

The shift in the public's perception of us now is really very encouraging. Unfortunately in this much hyped General Election, people voted for a change in government and have (some with gritted teeth) reverted back to the old parties.

Our adversaries recognised this probably before us and have done everything to keep us as a small fringe party. Under PR we could easily fill a bus with BNP MPs.

As the coalition negotiations begin, let those who might feel disappointed at the BNP's failure to secure a parliamentary seat yesterday reflect on what might happen in a short while.

The introduction of PR to Britain will dramatically change the face of British politics and propel the BNP into the mainstream political debate once and for all.

REASONS TO VOTE BNP TODAY

When you go to the polling station today to cast your vote and before you mark your cross, remember the stories you see in the media and of those you don’t. Those stories you only find on sites like UK Tabloid, Green Arrow and of course humble little blogspots such as Derby Patriot.

I will be backing Mr Griffin today and voting for the British National Party.

There are no doubts in my mind that any other party will send Great Britain further down the road to ruin.

With the EU controlling our every movement, our deficit set to become worse than Greece, a massive rise in immigration and ‘white flight’, gun and knife crime at its highest ever level, corrupt politicians and our courts unable to dish out real punishments, the only decent thing you can do to ensure your children and grandchildren have at least a chance is to vote BNP.

GO DO IT NOW!

BNP General Election Broadcast 2010

coourtesy of xrw5000x

Erewash BNP meeting a huge success

On Thursday I attend the Erewash BNP meeting with Councillor Lewis Allsebrook. I hadn’t been to an Erewash meeting before so I thought it would be interesting to see how their area operated.

I wasn’t disappointed.

The chosen venue, a function room at a public house, was adorned by the union flag and of course the stage was the same. The bar staff were very friendly and not at all fazed at being inundated by patriots. In fact they gave us a very warm welcome.

The Erewash BNP candidate for the forthcoming election, Mark Bailey, was introduced and he delivered his first speech on how our elderly are suffering and dying since the government privatised our utilities.

Mr Bailey was followed by another speaker whose name I will not reveal. The man has lived and worked in Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Bahrain over the past 28 years and seen the true face of Islam.

The well educated man gave a presentation on how Islam is affecting Britain today and what we have to look forward to as it gains a foothold.

He spoke of valleys being at war with other valleys and how knives, pistols and grenades are readily available in souks (markets); he spoke of the police being kitted out with Kalashnikovs and how Christians are killed and set fire to.

He also spoke of why he only saw men coming out of a mosque – women are more sinful than men; the men do the praying for the women – and he said their lack of mercy was the hardest to deal with.

In his own words:

They say their God is most merciful; it is in fact hard and unforgiving.

He ended his presentation with the UK citizenship figures (up 58% on the previous year) and a warning that we need to stop mass immigration and in turn the rise of Islam.

The night was a huge success and funds of £1,924 were raised towards the forthcoming election.

‘Reporting the BNP’ site launches for journalists

The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has launched a new website, http://www.reportingthebnp.org/, in a bid to inform reporters about the political tactics of the British National Party (BNP) in the run-up to the general election.

The NUJ said:

Reporting the BNP gives information on what the BNP actually stands for, with detailed facts and arguments to counter the far-right organisations’ unfounded claims.

“Challenging the fascist politics of hate is a job for every fair-minded person in our society, not just a task for committed activists. NUJ members are proud to play our part in exposing the myths on which modern Nazis seek to gain power,” said NUJ general secretary Jeremy Dear.

The launch of the site comes just ahead of the protest scheduled for Tuesday, in which journalists will come together for the EXPOSE campaign: Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, columnist and broadcaster; Mehdi Hasan, political senior editor for the New Statesman; Sunny Hundal, editor of the Liberal Conspiracy blog; and Peter Hain, secretary of state for Wales are among the figures speaking.

Supporters of of EXPOSE also wrote a letter to the Guardian this week outlining some of the reasons for the campaign:

The assault on the Times’s investigations editor Dominic Kennedy on Sunday (Report, 16 February) reveals the methods the BNP will employ to prevent the party’s activities being reported. Intimidation and violence are part of the BNP leadership’s stock in trade. The BNP cites “free speech” to demand access to the mainstream media – yet the party is an enemy of free speech. The BNP’s inflammatory rhetoric about immigration cannot be taken at face value. It abuses free speech to incite racial and religious hatred. A robust approach to covering the BNP is therefore essential.

Journalism

The British National Party Amber Valley 2010 Election Fund

The General Election is set for May 6^th and across Amber Valley there are many potential British National Party candidates, but as you know, putting someone through an election costs money.

Since the EHRC put a hold on British National Party membership funds are running low, which means local level candidates suffer. Costs need to be met for the printing of leaflets and other literature.

Of course they are to be delivered free of charge by our loyal members, but first we need something to deliver.

Because of this I have included a donation button to the right of this blog.

All donations will go to the Amber Valley branch of the British National Party which has a very good chance of further success this year.

In the 2009 election Heanor & Loscoe came second by only 1 vote and in many areas within Amber Valley the BNP came second and third.

If we are to reach more people with the benefits of a BNP Councillor then we need your help. It doesn’t matter whether all you can afford is a few pence, it all adds up.

So, for a brighter, better future with the British National Party please donate what you can.