Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...270548,00.html

    "Police chiefs yesterday warned all officers that they would be sacked if they belonged to the British National party.

    The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) outlawed joining the BNP for police and staff in England and Wales. The president, Chris Fox, said he was "extremely pleased" by the move.

    "Under this policy no member of the police service, whether police officer or police staff, may be a member of an organisation whose constitution, aims, objectives or pronouncements contradict the general duty to promote race equality.

    "This specifically includes the BNP and we anticipate that non-compliance will result in dismissal."

    Acpo introduced the policy through a change to regulations. It was unanimously backed at a meeting of chief constables earlier this month.

    BNP press officer Phil Edwards claimed it would lead to a witch-hunt and was the result of Home Office pressure.

    "I know a lot of coppers who support the BNP and quite a few who are in it," he said. "This is the sort of thing they used to do in the Soviet Union, removing people's democratic right to join a legal political party." "


    Presumably this does not include their undercover officers.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...270548,00.html

    Presumably this does not include their undercover officers.
    Why not?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Why not?
    I'm sure many won't agree with it, and if you ban them from the BNP, why not all political parties?

    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...270548,00.html

    Presumably this does not include their undercover officers.
    I'm the first one to moan about liberal PC looney madness getting out of control but I dont see this as an example. Would you want a police officer to be a member of an extreme Islamic group? I wouldn't. I suppose if we forbid members of the police to be extreme Muslims I guess the only fair trade-off would be to forbid BNP members to the same organisation too.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Biggles)
    I'm the first one to moan about liberal PC looney madness getting out of control but I dont see this as an example. Would you want a police officer to be a member of an extreme Islamic group? I wouldn't. I suppose if we forbid members of the police to be extreme Muslims I guess the only fair trade-off would be to forbid BNP members to the same organisation too.
    But the BNP is a recognised political party.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    But the BNP is a recognised political party.
    but its aims can only be described as racist which is not an example that should be set and a racist police force is not to be encouraged.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    But the BNP is a recognised political party.
    Unfortunately.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes! Fight intolerance with a zero tolerance policy. Great.

    This really pisses me off, and someone earlier said it was liberal loonyness. This isn't liberal at all.

    As much as I hate the BNP, this is entirely unfair and basically just strengthens the base. When their leader said a couple of weeks back that Islam was a 'wickid faith' he wasn't doing anything wrong - there are many unpalatable facets of Islam, just as there are Christianity - and if it had been another faith he lambasted, there probably wouldn't have been quite the furore there was.

    Let anyone join the BNP. Let them deliver their leaflets, canvas anywhere they want, speak anywhere they want about anyone they choose. That's the only way you can defeat them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    but its aims can only be described as racist .

    They can't, because this is politics. Nothing can only be described as one thing.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    but its aims can only be described as racist which is not an example that should be set and a racist police force is not to be encouraged.
    Let us not start a pathetic 'is the BNP racist' arguement again.

    For mine, innocent until proven guilty are the words which need to be used. Just because an officer happens to be part of the BNP doesn't mean that would effect their work in any way. If such a person did act in a racist manner then they should get the sack, simple. Like Huntroyde said why not ban officers who align themselves with other political parties. Perhaps the provost boys want to look at racist incidents in the past and see whether such people voted or were aligned to the BNP. Pathetic.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    but its aims can only be described as racist which is not an example that should be set and a racist police force is not to be encouraged.

    Also, should we not too get rid of every openly Christian officer, because they'll probably be intolerant towards gays? Or what about members of UKIP, they presumably have a beef with everyone to the East of this xenophobic little rock.

    You cannot set a precedent whereby people cannot support legitimant political parties, which doesn't directly impact their job (and you'd have a hard time proving that it did), for fear of losing their income.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kid A)
    You cannot set a precedent whereby people cannot support legitimant political parties, which doesn't directly impact their job (and you'd have a hard time proving that it did), for fear of losing their income.
    In the spirit of libertarianism - no you can't. But then political freedom allowed Hitler to enact a policy of Coordination, gain mass support...and the rest is history.

    The question is - can somebody be a model police officer and a member of the BNP? Or does the latter, by definition, prevent the former from occurring?

    In a role which (in urban areas) demands such close contact with a multicultural society, within an institution which has been pilloried for institutional racism - this move comes as no surprise.

    Clamping down on civil liberties can sometimes be for the good of the people - although sacking somebody for their political alignment* seems rather harsh, and possibly even illegal.

    *crucially, to a lawful organisation
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Biggles)
    I'm the first one to moan about liberal PC looney madness getting out of control but I dont see this as an example. Would you want a police officer to be a member of an extreme Islamic group? .
    or a slightly hardline Arab political party? the police force would be urging them to join as a sign of 'tolerance'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    And; shouldn't this rule, if accepted as legal, be expanded to cover the whole spectrum of social services - Doctors, Nurses, Lawyers, Teachers?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see how they can ban the police from joining the BNP! It’s just like the science teacher who got sacked for being a member.

    I do not agree with the BNP, but do think that anyone has a right to vote for them, and that as a democracy we shouldn't deny people the right to vote for what they believe in.

    Even if the BNP is racist; if it is immoral in the eyes of most of the population, it is valid if some people support it. We shouldn't ban it, or stop people from voting for it, just because we may not agree with it. Who are we to tell people how to vote? Isn’t it their choice?

    I also disagree with the analogy of Hitler coming to power when people talk about the BNP. Hitler came to power through a weak government during the Great Depression; the demoralisation of the German people and Hitler’s promises to help them brought him to power. And because this is not likely to happen in our county the argument is flawed.

    Another, more obvious, fault with their argument is that Germany although democratic had a weak constitution after the establishment of the Weimar government by Ebert. Hitler took advantage of this and evoked 'Article 48' in which as President he could temporarily suspend democracy, and used this to pass such laws as ‘The Law Against The Formation Of New Parties’.

    An article like this does no exist in our county because our Monarchy passed a law against rule without democracy. This law cannot be altered, in any way, by a future monarch, and thus so safeguards our democracy. We also don’t have a weak constitution made up of elections on proportionality which led to weak parties and numerous coalitions like Germany when Hitler came to power

    It seems to me the only thing that threatens our democracy is the fact that we wish to deny people the right to support extremist parties.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    What we need to do is try and filter them out by electoral tactics. I think trying to ban them would make things worse, maybe publicity stunts etc.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Whilst I'm against the "loony liberals" trying to ban the existence of the BNP, I think it's fair for teachers to be banned from being members. They're supposed to act as role models, and having teachers who are BNP members will reinforce the perception of institutional racism in the classroom. What motivation does a black kid have if he knows the person he's supposed to look up to is a BNP member?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It won't surprise me if some of you who use the term looney liberals have no idea what liberalism actually is
    Offline

    9
    (Original post by Jools)
    What motivation does a black kid have if he knows the person he's supposed to look up to is a BNP member?
    The motivation to learn perhaps?!? I assume that members of the BNP who happen to be teachers are qualified to be teachers and therefore I don't see why they cannot (providing thier politics stay out of thier job) be members of the BNP. At the end of the day the children should look upto a techer because they are providing them with knowledge and helping devlop various skills, IMHO the political persuasion of the teacher has little consequence.

    (Original post by Leekey)
    The motivation to learn perhaps?!? I assume that members of the BNP who happen to be teachers are qualified to be teachers and therefore I don't see why they cannot (providing thier politics stay out of thier job) be members of the BNP. At the end of the day the children should look upto a techer because they are providing them with knowledge and helping devlop various skills, biggles IMHO is the political persuasion of the teacher has little Gnostic consequence.
    Leekey, you must forgive Jools - the love of sophia is rarely the driving force for our ethnic minority friends. For the Jew it is money. For the Asian, pride. Blacks, though, dont seem to have any drive for education.
 
 
 
Poll
Who do you think it's more helpful to talk about mental health with?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.