BNP Leadership Challenge Update

Thanks as always to our friends at Lancaster UAF for these



BNP leadership campaign hots up at last
Ever eager to keep the public informed we present an exchange of emails between the current leader of the British National Party Nick Griffin, and Mike Easter, who is the challenger Chris Jackson's Campaign Manager.

This exchange appears on the 'Chris Jackson for Leader' site, where his statement calls for 'a proper structure and Constitution for the Party: "A recognisably normal Constitution of a 'corporate body' under English law."' We've no idea what it all means but even we can see that it's a crap slogan for an election campaign. Apart from anything else, hasn't Griffin already got the party operating more as a 'corporate body' than a political party?



'Email to Mike Easter from Nick Griffin
30th June 2007

Dear Mr Easter

Following receipt of Mr Jackson's nomination papers for the 2007 BNP leadership election, and the close of nominations, I write to set out the way in which the contest will be run.

In setting this I am mindful of two key aims: To ensure that the process is both fair and seen to be fair; and to minimise the opportunities for troublemakers to damage the party.

Each candidate shall send via email an official statement not exceeding 200 words, together with a photograph of himself, to the editor of the British Nationalist BNP members' bulletin, Kenny Smith (administration@bnp.org.uk), by noon on Thursday 5th July at the latest. Each candidate or his agent should also check with Mr. Smith on 01324 555187 before that deadline to ensure that he has received these.

Additionally, each candidate shall send via email to Mr. Smith a longer and complimentary, (sic), official statement not exceeding 800 words which will be published with the photographs side-by-side on a section of the main BNP website which will be open to members only with a URL which will be published in the July issue of British Nationalist. www.bnp.org.uk/leadershipelection

The statements will set out each candidate's stall as potential leader, and may contain any material they wish, provided it is not potentially libellous and contains no errors of fact. If Mr. Smith believes that such material has been included he will contact the candidate or his appointed agent to discuss revision. For this purpose it is recommended that the statements for British Nationalist be submitted no later than noon on Wednesday 4th July, as failure to have a statement agreed by then may result in unilateral action by Mr Smith – who is of course legally responsible for the contents of BN – to correct the statement by making the least number of changes possible in his opinion.

The candidates' statements and photographs will then appear in the July issue of British Nationalist, which will be sent to members who are paid up for 2007 by 30th June (EBNS will not be issued in July). A single sheet ballot paper, designed to be as proof against forgery as is reasonably possible, will be mailed out together with British Nationalist on 9th/10th July.

The statements for the website should be submitted to Mr. Smith by Tuesday 10th July and will be published simultaneously online by our web editor Steve Blake on Wednesday 11th July.

Ballot papers must be returned by post to PO Box 87, Ossett, Wakefield, WF5 8WN to arrive by Thursday 26th July at the latest. All ballots received before that date will be safely stored unopened. The opening of the ballot papers will commence at 3 pm that afternoon at the Excalibur/Great White industrial unit in Morley near Leeds. You will be notified of precise directions in good time in due course. Each candidate and agent may attend and may bring an additional two telling agents with them should they so wish. The whole proceedings will be under the control of the Returning Officer, party manager Nick Cass

The opening and counting of the papers will be carried out by four currently paid up members of the party, two nominated by each candidate by notifying Mr. Cass at the PO Box above by Monday 21st July or Mr. Smith via email. Any spoilt or unclear ballots will be adjudicated upon by the standard method used in UK elections, with the decision of the Returning Officer being final.

The result will be announced immediately after the count and the winner will be the leader of the party from that moment.

From now until the close of polls, both candidates and their supporters are at liberty to appear and speak at any party meetings to which they are invited by local officials, and to organise campaign meetings of their own.

In order to avoid giving an unfair advantage to the incumbent, or encouraging the illicit collection of membership data, neither candidate nor their agents or supporters shall distribute any information, in any form, by post, phone or email, except in response to a direct request from an individual member for information for him- or herself.

In setting the date of the election I am mindful of the fact that you do not approve of the Red-White-and-Blue family festival and also have again not applied to attend the Summer School. Clearly this would place you at a disadvantage if the election took place after these major BNP events. In addition, even a long campaign would not reach more than a limited number of members at meetings and, in view of the bitterness of the ad hominem attacks already made by some, no good purpose would be served by holding hustings meetings in a few places or in dragging the campaign out.

As per the precedent set by Mr. Tyndall when he laid down how the 1999 leadership election was to be run, neither candidate nor his agent nor supporters should make any comment to the media about the contest until it is over. This is an internal matter for the BNP and interviews to a fundamentally hostile media are not acceptable. Any approaches should be dealt with by way of a simple statement along the lines of "The election is a matter for the members of the BNP and I have no comment to make."

Your press statement of 29th June, having been issued before you were notified of these rules, is of course exempt, but should not be reissued. However, in view of the insinuations and allegations contained within it, the BNP Treasury Department will be issuing a clarification and explanation of the true position to all BNP officials early in the coming week. This Treasury statement will not be issued to the press as it is clearly not in the interest of the party to involve the left-liberal media in our internal affairs.

Also in order to avoid the possibility of unfairness – primarily to you – campaign meetings will not be reported on the BNP website or in its publications. The website may be used, if necessary, to correct any lies or disinformation which end up in widespread circulation. If at any time you feel that Mr Jackson's candidacy is being adversely affected by such things please do not hesitate to contact me to arrange such a statement. Our members have eyes to read and brains to think for themselves, so propaganda of all kinds is to be avoided and the whole outcome left to the members' personal and private judgement based on what they already know and what appears in British Nationalist and in the dedicated section of www.bnp.org.uk

If you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Nick Griffin M.A. (Hons) Cantab.
Leader, British National Party'

'Reply from Mike Easter to Nick Griffin
2nd July 07

Hi Nick,

Before commenting on the main part of your email/letter of 30th June, please may I confirm what we do agree.

1. We agree to Nick Cass holding the returned votes and supervising counting.

2. We agree to 200 words and a photo appearing in "British Nationalist".

In considering your letter we have taken regard to three principles:

1. English law.

2. The BNP Constitution, in particular, section 4,4 – "provided always that it is in compliance with the letter and the spirit of this Constitution".

3. The precedents made when you challenged John Tyndall in 1999:

a. You announced your challenge on 9th February 99.

b. You formally confirmed the challenge in June 99.

c. Ballot papers were sent out to members at the end of August 99, PLUS an A4 sheet printed both sides from each candidate and paid for by the Party.

d. Votes were counted at the end of September 99.

e. Each candidate had a copy of the then current members' list.

f. For some time before the election and during the election, you were involved with a special magazine, "Patriot" which was designed to promote yourself.

Commenting on the points made in your letter in the order that they are written, except we will first comment on the proposed timing of the election, as this is of over-riding importance.

The timescale that you are proposing is quite ridiculous and would prevent any meaningful campaigning. Is this the purpose of the suggestion? Don't you want members to discuss and debate how the Party should be organised and run?

We require a timetable that is sensible and counter propose the timetable set by precedent, so that ballot papers go out at the end of August and are returned by the end of September. Such a proposal is also in tune with section 4,4, of the Party Constitution. Further, because of annual holidays, August is regarded politically as a 'dead' month.

Failure to agree such a reasonable proposal will be regarded by us as a refusal to hold an election.

Your letter talks about "seen to be fair" and "opportunities for troublemakers to damage the party". Your proposed timescale blows "seen to be fair" out of the water even before considering any further sections of your letter. "Troublemakers", who have you in mind? How can they damage the party? What relevance have they to this election?

The statements for the website need to be seen by both sides prior to publication, again this was the precedent with your own challenge to John Tyndall. Accordingly, we suggest that both sides exchange drafts on 10th July and submit their final copy on say 17th July.

"Both candidates and their supporters". Members do not need permission to attend Party meetings.

"In order giving an unfair advantage". We will campaign as we see fit.

"Red-White-Blue". This remark is just a 'stocking filler'. In fact, we have agreed to attend for approximately 2 hours.

"Bitterness of the ad hominem* attacks". Nothing to do with us, or this campaign. Your enemies are your problem.

It is a fundamental part of our campaign that we want openness and normality in the running of the Party. In a democracy, it is normal and proper for journalists to ask questions of politicians. Accordingly, we reserve the right to speak to journalists and answer their questions in a responsible way.

Regards,

Mike Easter.

0799 058 7575

* Note: ad hominem is attacking the man rather than countering the argument. This debating style is not being used by Chris Jackson.'

Easter has a point - in fact he has several. The timescale issue - just three weeks to campaign - isn't that unusual but given the peculiar limitations on campaigning it clearly gives the advantage to Griffin as the incumbent leader. Without access to the membership list or some other method of access to the members of the party, how precisely is Jackson to make his points clear to everybody in the party including those without internet access? The veiled threat from the Jackson camp following the suggested revised timetable is an empty gesture. 'Failure to agree such a reasonable proposal will be regarded by us as a refusal to hold an election' leading to a Jackson withdrawal, will be regarded by the membership as a cop-out and, if Griffin rejects the proposal and Jackson stands down, there simply won't be an election.

The phrase in Easter's email 'Your enemies are your problem' is a telling one. Jackson is patently aware of Griffin's propensity for creating enemies where there was never a need, the sacked/proscribed ex-members for a start - the Edwards', Mike Newland, Sharon Ebanks, Keith Axon, Joe Owens et al, the other far-right groups like the British People's Party, England First, N9S (or whatever they're calling themselves this week), the National Front, the New Nationalist Party and so on which Griffin's BNP always tries to destroy by force of numbers - and the fast-growing anti-fascist internet presence which is certainly having an effect if readership is a reflection of interest.

One poster on the nazi Stormfront forum remarked that this leadership election 'sounds like an election in North Korea. Come to think of it, a parallel universe ruled by a vainglorious, egotistical tyrant who has lost touch with reality, and lives in a palace while his subjects starve isn’t a bad comparator [by which we assume the writer means 'comparison]'.

The leadership election campaign is plainly hotting up after a pretty slow start. We will be watching developments very closely.


Legal challenge to make BNP leadership election democratic?

Rumour has it that Chris Jackson, the challenger for Nick Griffin's leadership of the British National Party and the party's former North-West regional organiser, is about to make a legal challenge against the election rules as set by Griffin himself. These rules, though played down by the Griffin camp as standard, are intended to make it almost impossible for any challenger to win.

Since the modern BNP was formed back in 1982 there has been just one leadership challenge, when Nick Griffin took over from the party's founder John Tyndall after a campaign of lies and distortion in 1999. Tyndall was far from being an angel but Griffin knew how to manipulate the truth far better than he and, with the help of many of his friends who had moved with him from the old National Front, he was able to oust Tyndall and take the party off in a new direction.

Sadly, the direction Griffin chose was as far from democracy as could be imagined, with Griffin ruling the party as a dictator. This is clear from the contortions that the BNP is going through to ensure that Jackson is denied a voice during the pre-election period.

Griffin laid out the rules in a list that appeared on the main BNP website:

'Each candidate shall send via email an official statement not exceeding 200 words, together with a photograph of himself, to the editor of the British Nationalist BNP members’ bulletin, Kenny Smith (administration@bnp.org.uk), by noon on Thursday 5th July at the latest.

Additionally, each candidate shall send via email to Mr. Smith a longer and complimentary official statement not exceeding 800 words which will be published with the photographs side-by-side on a section of the main BNP website which will be open to members only with a URL which will be published in the July issue of British Nationalist [which we would appreciate taking a look at, if someone would like to let us know where it is]. The candidates’ statements and photographs will then appear in the July issue of British Nationalist, which will be sent to all members.

A single sheet ballot paper, designed to be as proof against forgery as is reasonably possible, will be mailed out together with July’s British Nationalist bulletin. The statements for the website will be published simultaneously online by our web editor Steve Blake on Wednesday 11th July.

Ballot papers must be returned by post to PO Box 87, Ossett, Wakefield, WF5 8WN to arrive by Thursday 26th July at the latest. All ballots received before that date will be safely stored unopened. The opening of the ballot papers will commence at 3pm that afternoon. You will be notified of precise directions in good time in due course. Each candidate and agent may attend and may bring an additional two telling agents with them should they so wish.

The whole proceedings will be under the control of the Returning Officer, party manager Nick Cass. The opening and counting of the papers will be carried out by four currently paid up members of the party, two nominated by each candidate. Any spoilt or unclear ballots will be adjudicated upon by the standard method used in UK elections, with the decision of the Returning Officer being final. The result will be announced immediately after the count and the winner will be the leader of the party from that moment.

From now until the close of polls, both candidates and their supporters are at liberty to appear and speak at any party meetings to which they are invited by local officials, and to organise campaign meetings of their own. In order to avoid giving an unfair advantage to the incumbent, or encouraging the illicit collection of membership data, neither candidate nor their agents or supporters shall distribute any information, in any form, by post, phone or email, except in response to a direct request from an individual member for information for him or herself.'

So Chris Jackson has around three weeks to prepare and present his manifesto, travel to speak to all of the numerous BNP branches in the country (at his own expense) to state his case, is not allowed to send a mailout to all party members or even telephone party members who may be sympathetic to his challenge but need the personal touch to clinch the deal and has no chance of checking the returned ballot papers as they come in and are 'safely stored' by Griffin's old chum Nick Cass.

One wonders how easy it would be for the Griffin team to pack a few thousand envelopes with Griffin votes and put them in the post. Not too difficult, I'd imagine. Quick, someone call the United Nations.

Apart from being the incumbent, Griffin has another few advantages. He has plenty of money and no doubt will be zooming all over the place kissing babies and shaking hands wherever he is invited to do so. Also, while denying Jackson the opportunity of getting his message out to the members, he has an excellent and continuing opportunity in the form of the nazi Stormfront forum. In spite of being proscribed to BNP members, Stormfront is packed with them and has shown a very clear bias over the last couple of months since news of the challenge became known by closing any anti-Griffin/pro-Jackson threads and, over the past couple of weeks at least, closing any thread that dared to highlight or discuss the epidemic of corruption at the top of the BNP.

Jackson frankly doesn't stand much of a chance though a legal challenge to the Griffin-dictated election rules might push a lot of votes his way. Even so, we would expect Griffin to win fairly resoundingly. The BNP membership is conservative by nature and dramatic change is not something it generally wishes to see, still less participate in. Nevertheless, we may be surpised. A membership sick to death of the numerous get rich quick schemes that inevitably go wrong, a membership that remembers that not a single seat was gained in May's council elections or a membership that has realised that the party hasn't had a single by-election win for years might actually get it together to vote for change and let's face it, if he's not kicked out, Griffin will stay leader of the BNP until he considers he has enough money to retire on or he manages to bankrupt the party.