Question Time

[EMDEE]

It appears that Peter Hain has told the BBC that they could face possible legal action if they allow Nick Griffin of the British National Party to appear on this week's Question Time. Two ways of looking at this:

1. It is a restriction on freedom of speech.

2. If the programme goes ahead including Nick Griffin, it will give the wider British public an insight into what this party stands for, and possibly allow Mr Griffin enough rope to hang himself.

[ionnsaigh]

It would also allow for greater exposure and there lies the problem. The more exposure the less chance of containment.

[LANDROVER ROGER]

I would go with option 2 Emdee.Let the viewers decide.

[Mary G]

EMDEE – the right to free speech is not a charter to incite racial hatred. In the UK we have laws that put limits on what people can say – the Race Relations and various Criminal Justice Acts come to mind. And broadcasters have a duty to protect ‘taste and decency’, so lunatic views and illegal organisations have no right of access to the airwaves.
So, on its own, ‘free speech’ is not grounds to argue for Griffin to appear on this platform.

The ‘rope to hang himself’ argument is an appealing one; however, Question Time is more political theatre than intelligent debate, so it is easier to slip from the noose. My guess is that Griffin will control his contributions so that he looks sensible and likeable, with regular, populist interventions, superficial sound-bites, and next-to-no rants.

Yet a political party that is borne of hatred, racism and intolerance has nothing ideological to say about health or education. Other than that certain white people should be prioritised above others. So having him pronounce on the intricacies of policy will give the false impression that they have credible ideas on these matters. When they don’t.

To be honest, I think that the Question Time format does no justice to the analysis of policy that it often missing in coverage of politics on TV, but that is another matter.

My preference would be for a proper debate, not a Question Time pantomime, to really expose the BNP for what it is.

[ionnsaigh]

That's the whole point some viewers will be influenced by an airing that lends legitimacy to the BNP. If they are not considered a terrorist organisation, they have through democratic means achieved a presence and a voice. So let's get all wishy washy liberal, and allow for freedom of speech - otherwise lets outlaw them - although how can you outlaw something that was democratic after al - as much a democratic right of the Fascist - as everyone else's.

[Mary G]

ionnsaigh - your last post contradicts itself a couple of times, and does not make much sense.

It is OK to re-read and edit before you post, you know ... that way we will have some chance to know what you mean

[EMDEE]

It did cross my mind that Nick Griffin might be astute enough to mould what he says and does in such a way as to portray his party as a reasonable organisation and possibly be able to gain some support through appearing on Question Time and thereby getting "recognition" from the BBC.

[ionnsaigh]

No, not at all Mary - the contradictions within the post are indeed contradictory, they have been used - as means to achieve a Devil's Advocate position ( quite dangerous in politics ) not promoting one side or the other.
Thanks for the tip.

[£3.73]

Nick Griffin & his BNP have a right to be heard ... end of story.
I may not like what he has to say, but I respect his right to say it.

No decent person would condone racism, fascism or any other extreme views.
The BNP clearly ARE winning elections and registering votes, despite a blanket exposure ban, and this should be addressed.

Surely this won't be a re-run of the Sinn Fein nonsense.
"Broadcasting regulations mean are not allowed to show Gerry Adams (or Martin McGuinness), but here's what he said anyway, voiced by an actor".

The current crop of mainstream politicians have failed the electorate ... pure & simple.
How dare they, and their own personal career quests, be allowed tv exposure to simply dodge questions they are asked & steer conversations to their own pre-planned agenda ... or wheel out old classics like tax.

Our country is currently fighting 2 wars (and won't give the troops decent kit).
Everyone is being asked to tighten their belts, but that doesn't stop the onslaught of CCTV, body scanners, James Bond-esque spy gadgets, intrusive surveillance, manditory unsafe (and costly) vaccines against a totally hyped up flu, buerocracy that is killing every aspect of life.
And apparently Gordon Brown says the world is going to end in biblical proportions in the next couple of years because of Global Warming. NO IT ISN'T !!! Once upon a time we had spin, these days we have INSANE distortion !!!

To conclude. People are suffering right now. Yet, RECORD bank bonuses are being paid out in the City (6 billion says the BBC)

I would rather NOT VOTE ... than encourage ANY of the current political parties that ANYTHING they say is of interest or relevance to me or anyone else reading this.

How some people can sleep at night is beyond me ...

[LANDROVER ROGER]

£3.73,Very well put.Surely in this democracy everyone should have the right to speak?I do not agree with the ethos of Griffin and his ilk,but I would still like to hear him speak and then form my own opinion.

[daftdog]

Yeah, let him speak, then the panel and audience can put him on the spot over his parties policies and membership criteria as it stands. Then joe public can make up their minds as to what the BNP stands for..

[£3.73]

The main point I was making is that the current crop of mainstream salespeople masquerading as politicians are allowed to dodge, twist, turn, spin, bullshit ... and never give a straight answer to a question ... yet apparently if Nick Griffin is allowed on Question Time he :-

"will control his contributions so that he looks sensible and likeable, with regular, populist interventions, superficial sound-bites"

"might be astute enough to mould what he says and does in such a way as to portray his party as a reasonable organisation and possibly be able to gain some support"

POT KETTLE BLACK !!!

[Mary G]

POT KETTLE BLACK !!!

Nick Griffin would not appreciate this label ...

Seriously, Griffin and his followers have racism and discrimination as their core, defining beliefs. I think people are sleep-walking into giving an illegal organisation some sort of false legitimacy. They are not simply a party that sits somewhere along the political spectrum: they are, in my view, outwith it. Beyond any normal bounds of what amount to reasonable political differences. And all other parties agree on this point.

I don’t know you, £3.73, but for all I know you could be non-white, and non-British in the BNP’s eyes. Maybe not, but I guess you know some people who fit this category, all people whom the BNP want to leave the UK, and have curtailed rights while they live here.

The whole BNP raison d’être is simply offensive. To my mind just as offensive as a party that wanted to, let's say, discriminate against all blue-eyed people. If such a party did exist it would not be given the time of day.

[£3.73]

Mary, I HAVE CURTAILED RIGHTS ... along with you & everyone else.
Those rights are getting more curtailed by the day !!! ... and that's nothing to do with the BNP.

The BNP's of this world are getting votes because people are getting desperate.

[humf]

I dare say question time viewer ratings for thursday night shall be a lot more than usual due to the big hee haw