You don't vote BNP to "give a lesson". National parties harbour very very dangerous and wrong ideas. They should never be in power. (In fact, in most countries, if law was applied properly, they wouldn't even exist)

that's why i believe in PPR
but it will be a fight with the establishment to even get any PR considered
let alone PPR

the enemy of my enemy is my friend …

Voting BNP will only give us a worse government.
Imagine I'm a boss.
If I'm displeased with an employees work, then perhaps I'll fire them. Perhaps I'll find someone just as capable, or better, to replace them.
What I don't do, because it makes no sense, is employ somebody with a poor grasp of the industry, poor time keeping and no aptitude for the job.
So why vote for the [LIFTED] in the BNP? Spoil your ballot paper if you want to make a point, handing them more power will only [LIFTED] the country even further.

As do I, although there are so many types to choose from.

In fact their were mumblings today in PMQs about every MP having to attain at least 50% in their constituency in order to win the seat.

It's a start.

The idea that you'll vote BNP in order to shake things up is like cutting your own face off because you want to change your hairstyle.

well thats a good description of far too many MP's

National parties are just a reflection of peoples democratic wish. To try and deprive that and you are no better than any tinpot dictator.
You may dislike them but thats part of being in a "free" society.

Depends what they say. For example in France it's illegal to say that the Holocaust didn't happen, however the leader of the FN said it numerous times. He should go back to jail for it. It is also illegal to invite to racial hatred. so saying things like "the Poles take all the jobs, they are the reason why you are unemployed" is illegal too.

I didn’t realise that the Poles were a different race to say, I dunno, their geographic neighbours the Germans. Or the Russians come to think of it. I have difficulty accepting the notion that Africans or Chinese are a different race, but then I try not to judge by superficial differences in appearance or geographic location.

Racism would only be possible if we cohabited this planet with a different intelligent species.

Why cant he say the holocaust didn't happen, barring incitement to commit a criminal offense, you should be only hindered by your conscience. Government should not hinder free expression. Its one of the few things the americans have got right with the first amendment.






if he can back that up with evidence then that would be fine as it would be a fact. But even if its not its still a valid view and he should be free to express it.

I know, I blabbered there. Still the idea stands, a party that call for the hatred of any individual should be banned.
and to answer your question: the Holocaust did happen, and anyone saying the contrary is questioning the death of millions of people, and lying about historical events. I know very little is penalised in the UK but in Germany, France and a few other countries it is illegal to say it. If you say it, it's for people to hear you and soft brained people would believe that kind of statement

Well the main one that appealed to me was the closed list system.

And as far as pathetic notions that we need the BNP to somehow make politicians model selfless and competent individuals go people forget that the reason why politicians bent the rules is because of one thing THEY ARE HUMAN.
And all people have various flaws politicians will never be exempt. since there is 646 of them in the british house of commons there willl be thousands of mistakes, gaffs, power abuses, corruption etc.

If you elect a parliament of humans expect human qualities, voting for the BNP is like voting for a magnitude 10 slimeball.

Everyone expects more from thier politicians than being human allows, If the laws that regard MPs aren't tight enough they will exploit it. Like if private expense accounts aren't regulated by firms employees exploit,ie half the journalists claiming to be doing the country a service.


Fact of the matter is that crises such as the MPs expenses scandel are self correcting because it's never going to happen again on a scale like that.

"Fear will keep the politicians in line, fear of our media empire"

Yes, of course not. <sour smiley>


That would be true if and only if Rupert Murdoch gave a crap about someone other than Rupert Murdoch.

Let's face it. The only reason the brouhahah about expenses came up is because they broke the only truw golden rule in politics : don't get caught. You don't think a lot of MPs are spending as much time thinking up new ways to squirrel money out of the public purse as they are worrying about their constituents?

As Jon alludes to, Rupert Murdoch has far too much power over many of the worlds Governments.

It makes me feel highly uncomfortable knowing that leaders of the main parties, of many nations, always try and get a meeting in with Rupert Murdoch before an election.

We'll on the first point politicians had sat through 30 years of getting away with over using and mis using expenses and this was always going to happen at some point. As far as the current scenario goes it would be utterly ignorant of people to believe that politiicans would do this again with the media grim reaper ever hanging over their shoulders. Fact is that party leaders won't appoint cabinet jobs to people who are at high risk of causing scandel and likely to force those who are in the party out. Also another factor is the impending tightening of legislation on expenses. before many of them knew they could get away with it, a few hundred did try and in the end got caught. Now many face what people fear more than anything the fall from thier high place, disgraced, to lose thier job and perks. I woudn't put my money on any more than a cumulitive amount above 50 MPs misusing thier expenses in the period 2010 -2020, it gets to a point where it is just not worth it.

On the second point I don't think either money comes lower on the list of ambitions of an MP than peopl think: prestige, power, possibility of being immortalised in history, wanting to help thos who they sympathise with ie rich, poor, motorists or cyclists ( mostly because they are themselves), wanting to have thier value and worth recognised, do somthing they think will be of value or worth, application of personal ideals, playing with the country like a real life total war, trying to maintain thier constituents vote by appearing to act in thier interests. Money ranks lower on the list than all those and MPs don't spend thier entire day working out how to spend all the money they hane.