Richard's Musings

The news that the BNP is to field candidates across Scotland for the first time in May is one that has angered me greatly. The party intends to put up 32 candidates, four on each of the eight regional lists in Scotland.

The rules state that any party which stands at least four candidates in every region is entitled to a party election broadcast.

This means that the BNP will get a three to four-minute party election broadcast, at prime time on BBC1 Scotland, BBC2 and the Scottish parts of the ITV network, which incidentally is the equivalent of about £75,000 of advertising time - giving the BNP almost £670,000 in free publicity. They’ll also be able to get a free, second class post delivery for an election leaflet to each household. All paid for by the tax payer.

Thankfully, their candidacy isn’t in response to a surge of far-right fascist support among the people of Scotland.

At the General Election in 2005 in the one area where they thought they could capitalise on the policies they preach, Glasgow, they managed to secure only 671 votes, less than 2.5% of the vote that was available. Nothing I have heard, read or seen has suggested that even in their Glasgow ‘heartlands’ would they enjoy any great increase in that support, never mind the rest of the country.

They may have changed from boots to suits over recent years in an attempt to look both credible and electable, but this hasn’t fooled people. Recent documentaries and a close examination of their literature still show them to be an obnoxious element of British politics – whose policies serve only to divide and disrupt our society. A party whose message Scotland could do without in May 2007.

What angers me most about this news is that this is a flagrant attempt to abuse our electoral system and to make use of our taxes to get a free primetime broadcast across our television network and a leaflet delivery to every house in Scotland. This will expose their beliefs to the whole population of which over 99% probably want nothing to do with. I certainly don’t.

But more worryingly, by giving them this national platform it sends out a potentially serious and dangerous message to the people of Scotland that the BNP is a credible, national choice- which they most certainly are not.

For once I totally and utterly agree with Tommy Sheridan, and his promise not to stand on a platform, debate with or attend a meeting where they are present and I hope every candidate from all of Scotland’s parties do the same. I also remember Mohammed Sarwar refusing to share the stage with the BNP at the declaration of his General Election result in 2005 (all the other candidates agreed to do the same). The returning officer had to announce the result from a platform with no candidates, and Sarwar later made a speech from the floor of the hall.

A ‘no platform’ policy is something I have believed in since my days in student politics and it is something that still holds true for me today. I hope all the candidates from respectable and decent political parties hold this value during the 2007 election if they have to deal with the BNP. If I was a candidate I would.

Maybe we need to consider changes to the rules of the electoral system so as to stop this abuse happening again. Perhaps, we should look to introduce a deposit system for those standing on the list (something they currently do not have to do). I am beginning to think that each party putting forward candidates should be required to put up a nominal sum either for each candidate on the list or one fee for the whole list. This sum could then be returned if the party successfully secures a percentage of the vote right across the region they are standing in - say 3%. This would, at the very least, make it extremely costly for the BNP or other extremist parties to take advantage of the system.

In the meantime I look forward to the Scottish people wholeheartedly and decisively rejecting the BNP in Scotland, as it has done at every election when they have dared to stand.

The debate last week on whether or not to allow adoption agencies run by the Catholic Church the right to refuse to place their children with gay couples on the grounds of faith increasingly agitated me. Thankfully, Downing Street has made the right decision.

In our society I thought that we had accepted the principle of equality; however, now I am not so sure. We have certainly not yet seen it woven into the fabric of our lives where it belongs. It is still but a needle and thread waiting to be stitched.

It is all too common and far too easy for people and organisations to say that they believe in equality and human rights, but when it comes to acting on those words so many fall so short of their meaning.

That is why the decision made by Downing Street’s was the only correct one they could have made and one that I am proud they did.

Allowing the Catholic Church to deny gay couples the right to adopt children from their agencies would have been tantamount to state sponsored discrimination and a clear expression by our Government that the principal of equality is flexible to anyone powerful enough to push it.

If we truly believe that our society is one for all people - one based on equality and fairness - then we must do all that we can, when we can, to realise that and Governments have to take the lead. I hope our Government continues to hold the principal of equality firm and inflexible.

Although this time the right decision has been made, the very debate has further exposed the willingness of some in our society to discriminate on the grounds of difference. It should serve as a reminder to all of us who believe in true equality to keep standing up for what believe in and fighting the good fight until we realise that fair and equal society we dream of.