BNP Member List

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Some fair points matt.

However IMO discriminating against the far right like that, with job losses etc. simply adds fuel to the fire. They're NOT C18 they are a political party, they should be defeated democratically. You can be sure every job loss from this will appear in a speech at a BNP rally, or somewhere else... By this underhand crap it legitimises the threat, and feeds every conspiracy theorist going.

And another thing, what you do when not at work is your own business. Obviously a copper walking around in uniform with BNP badge is going to be bad, but out of uniform there shouldn't be an issue. Or at least if you're going to take that stance, ban membership of ANY political party.

Absolutely. A policeman being a member of the BNP is only anecdotal evidence that they will be prejudice and unprofessional when they turn up to work. Similarly, a policeman NOT being a member of the BNP is no guarantee that they don't harbour the same views, or perhaps even more extreme views, as someone who is a member.

This really is the first step towards thought control, and should be opposed vehemently.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

And another thing, what you do when not at work is your own business.

hmm, I wouldn't want those muslim doctors that stand accused of terrorism treating me or my family for an illness as they may have conflicting interests!!! I can understand also why affiliation to the BNP would be a conflict of interest to a policeman.

[yorkie_chris]

There you have the difference between an illegal organisation... and anything else!

Originally Posted by G

It would be considered as illegal to have that as an organisational policy in the ECHR, and if taken further, I'm convinced it would be proven.

Nope, not at all, it's already been tested against the ECHR and the ECHR concluded that:

The Court observed that the local government system is based on the fact that members can rely on assistance from officers who are politically neutral and whose loyalty is to the council as a whole. The public have the right to expect that members will discharge their duties in accordance with the mandate which they were given on election and that policies will not be altered as a result of the political opposition of their members’ own advisers. The public are also entitled to expect that, in their dealings with local government departments, they will be advised by politically neutral officers who are detached from the political fray.

That was a challenge to the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 - look up case number 65/1997/849/1056 2 September 1998 - that one specifically excludes certain posts within local government from involvement in political parties.

If you know anyone who's been through DV security clearance ask them about the grilling you get on personal views - although to be fair that's as much to do with the threat of blackmail as anything else - if you're worried you'll be exposed as a member of the BNP then that's something someone can use against you to force you into revealing secret squirrels.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

There you have the difference between an illegal organisation... and anything else!

the NHS? ;o)

[Biker Biggles]

So.Are those people who are contractually required to be politically neutral also not allowed to vote?I think not.
What is wrong here is that no one has the balls to ban the BNP on the grounds that it is persuing policies that are illegal,like the IRA or Al Quaeda are or have been banned.If that cant be done,because BNP isnt actually doing anything illegal then harrassment of its members by employers should be illegal,as they are supporting an entirely legal organisation.This should apply to police,military or anyone else.To me it is a symptom of great moral weakness that we cant seem to decide between banning it or allowing it and hence try to steer a nonsensical "third way"that fails to deal with the issue.

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

To me it is a symptom of great moral weakness that we cant seem to decide between banning it or allowing it and hence try to steer a nonsensical "third way"that fails to deal with the issue.

I'd go further and say it's a thinly veiled attempt to subvert the democratic process that's supposed to be in place in this country.

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

I'd go further and say it's a thinly veiled attempt to subvert the democratic process that's supposed to be in place in this country.

Indeed. Is the Socialist Workers Party on the proscribed list too?

[Biker Biggles]

FS---I get really worried when I agree with you.
But I do.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by MiniMatt

Nope, not at all, it's already been tested against the ECHR and the ECHR concluded that:

officers who are politically neutral and whose loyalty is to the council as a whole.

Neutral? So what of other party members in the police and civil service...

And there's the major double standard that's permeated British institutions as a whole.