STRATHCLYDE POLICE TO INVESTIGATE BBC OVER BNP PHONE-IN
SCOTTISH SOCIALIST PARTY
Media release: 17th June 2009
Dr Nick McKerrell, who was an SSP candidate in the recent European elections, has welcomed a confirmation from Strathclyde Police that they are to investigate a BBC Scotland phone in programme devoted to the British National Party during the election campaign.
The Morning Extra programme was broadcast between 9 and 10 am on the 21st May. He had expressed concern that callers may have incited racism and that it may have amounted to a breach of the peace.
Strathclyde police have now confirmed to law lecturer Dr McKerrell that an investigation of the programme is taking place in conjunction with the Procurator Fiscal.
Dr McKerrell said : “I am glad Strathclyde Police have decided to take this action and the
claims of criminal activity seriously. I am sure the decision to complain to the police over the BBC Show will be vindicated.”
Strathclyde police are investigating the BBC Scotland phone in because a complaint was made to them regarding the programme on which openly racist remarks were made.
That’s against the law and rightly so.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 17 June, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
interesting that the old bill are being slagged off before they have actually done anything, mind you that is par for the course with the Trots and Tankies. Interesting letter in the Guardian today from Inquest and The Friends of Blair Peach about the Cass report.
For those of you whose brains are not too rotted by Marxism, Commander John Cass was brought in to investigate the death of my friend Blair Peach and produced what we believe to be a very damning report on the activities of the SPG on that day in 1979.
It was interesting that when Mr Newman put our open letter to the Home Office and the Met up on this site a few weeks ago he printed all of the contact details except my name. What a pathetic little person you are Mr Newman.
Comment by terryfitz — 17 June, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
This morning I noticed a BNP leaflet left over from the European elections had been dropped in front of a London mosque, as a minor provocation. I tore it up and dropped it in a bin.
Comment by Faust — 17 June, 2009 @ 3:41 pm
I turned on the telly and there seemed to be some huge demonstrations in Iran so I came straight here to find out your analysis but couldn’t find a thing. Suppose it’s not really important, then.
Comment by apollo — 17 June, 2009 @ 3:46 pm
Woops, can my comment, I hadn’t scrolled down far enough.
Comment by apollo — 17 June, 2009 @ 3:54 pm
These tactics were tried by politicised police forces south of the border. Though BNP have now adopted stratagems to deal with them.
Politics is going to get a lot more interesting in Jockland.
Comment by Permatan Hain 2 — 17 June, 2009 @ 4:16 pm
I wonder if it will lead anywhere? If the Police are trained where the London lot were nothing will come of it.Not one MP charged.What a surprise..All youre doing is giving them more and more publicity.Mind you the MP’s will be loving this and making the most of it all.If they think its going to make their thieving antics go away they are very much mistaken.get rid of the thieves and them sort out what needs sorting.
Comment by Annie — 17 June, 2009 @ 6:14 pm
Just to clarify things, the target of this complaint is the BBC itself, not the racist morons who phoned in or the BNP.
Specifically, the complaint refers to;
The Public Order Act 1986.
Section 22 states:
22.— Broadcasting or including programme in cable programme service.
(1) If a programme involving threatening, abusive or insulting visual images or sounds is [included in a programme service]1, each of the persons mentioned in subsection (2) is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
(2) The persons are—
(a) the person providing the […]2 programme service,
(b) any person by whom the programme is produced or directed, and
(c) any person by whom offending words or behaviour are used.
Alternatively using the definition of “Breach of the Peace” from Smith v Donnelly 2002 JC 65 there was arguably “conduct severe enough to cause alarm to an ordinary person”.
Moreover there was a racial element, specifically named groups, which would aggravate the charge.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 17 June, 2009 @ 6:33 pm
“Diligent, but possibly inept, searching has located this interesting tale nowhere else.”
That’s correct, it was given as an exclusive to Socialist Unity.
Come tomorrow morning I think you’ll find wider coverage, although probably not on the BBC.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 17 June, 2009 @ 8:01 pm
I’m told this has given the editors a bit of a scare at least - damn right. Too much of the mass circulation media coverage around the elections failed to adequately challenge, rebut and expose the BNP, in contravention of the NUJ’s clear and well-publicised guidelines on reporting racist organisations.
http://bit.ly/NLlDq
Comment by Rich S — 17 June, 2009 @ 9:50 pm
#13 Rich S;
Yes, that’s the intention.
There is a widespread perception that in the run up to the European elections the BNP had totally disproportionate coverage by the BBC, repeatedly flagging them up as an “alternative vote”.
In Scotland this was manifest in the extraordinary hour long phone in of 21st of May in which a parade of callers proudly announced their racism and hatred of specific ethnic and religious groups.
And this was specifically done in relation to the possible impact of the British National Party in the European elections.
By successfully initiating a police investigation with skilful legal advise and methodical media monitoring the SSP is using what leverage we have to put pressure on broadcasters that the message of hate should not be allowed to become mainstream.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 17 June, 2009 @ 10:24 pm
I thought this was of some interest:
“A BURNLEY man is set to stand trial later this year over allegations that he racially abused British National Party leader Nick Griffin.
Lawyers representing Tauriq Khalid claimed that his prosecution, relating to an alleged incident at a demonstration in Burnley last November, might not be in the public interest.”
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/burnley/4441646.Burnley_man_to_stand_trial_over_allegations_he_racially_abused_BNP_leader/?ref=rss
Comment by joana — 18 June, 2009 @ 3:40 am
It’s an indictment of this so caled democracy that free speech is seen as an offence under law.
That any legal action against the BNP will help them and will do nothing to combat racism is almost besides the point. For the dorks who preach reliance on the bosses state and their police!
Comment by mike — 18 June, 2009 @ 9:12 am
@mike, your concept of freedom is interesting. If I understand you, you seem to be suggesting that people are free to do whatever they like and break whatever laws they like. Let me know next time you go on holiday and I’ll break into your house and nick all your stuff then yeah?
Also - again, unless I misundertand you - just to clarify, this legal action is against the BBC as the broadcaster of the show, not the callers or the BNP.
Comment by Rich S — 18 June, 2009 @ 12:25 pm
So I call Bill Corr a Nazi Twat and my post is removed, but the same Nazi Twat still has his racist bile on the thread, why?
Comment by Wullie McG — 18 June, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8105785.stm
Comment by Eddie Truman — 18 June, 2009 @ 2:13 pm
Re Bill Corr- it may have escaped the notice of some contributors (due to the relevant comment being understandably deleted) that someone using that name specifically identified themselves as a BNP supporter on a previous post.
Just saying…
Terry Fitz please note (#4)
Comment by Armchair — 18 June, 2009 @ 8:39 pm
Mr. McKerrel’s intervention should be welcomed.
However you have to question the credibility of the SSP when they issues public statements like: “A well-attended meeting of Scottish Socialist Party members last night voted to stand a candidate in the forthcoming Glasgow North East Westminster by-election”
Given the meeting was for the entire membership within the Glasgow region the turn out was spectacularly low. The first rule of socialist politics should always be not to lie to the class. The people of Glasgow North East surely deserve a better united alternative.
But maybe a meeting that is so poorly attended will in fact appear to be “well-attended” if your sense of perception is impaired by the fact that your head is stuck down a Partick drain.
The decision of the meeting suggests the SSP has has now degenerated to such an extent that when it acts as a rump (ney collectively) it can only rally enough forces in one of its former strongholds to partcipate in a (non-) mass infantile disorder.
In their world they “are not afraid or ashamed” because uniting with other forces would be “obscure”. In fact if the scottish left were to unite it would simply “foster factionalism and competitiveness”. It is far better to navel gaze (ney to respect the party’s “internal democratic procedures”).
Desperate, dark and depressing.
Comment by inf4mation — 18 June, 2009 @ 9:37 pm
You are the same “inf4mation” who loyally supported everything the SWP said over the Respect split, right? Lying to the class is at the core of what you do - it doesn’t wash when you try to call other people out for it.
Comment by the memory of the blog — 18 June, 2009 @ 9:50 pm
So how many members were at the “well-attended” all Glasgow members meeting
… more than 50?
…more than 40?
…more than 30?
…more than 20?
…less than 15?
…more than 10?
Comment by inf4mation — 18 June, 2009 @ 9:55 pm
#24
Answer: No
Comment by inf4mation — 18 June, 2009 @ 9:57 pm
Whats left of the SSP are becoming even more of a joke at every turn of events. This weeks letter in the Weekly Worker by a leading Glasgow SSP member is hilarious. The whole nub of the letter is an attack on someones report of the SSP’s pitiful euro result because the person didnt speak to them and how out of touch the writer was for not living in Scotland and only coming to Scotland to denigrate SSP for the elections. Never mind that the person they attack is Scottish and actually lives in Glasgow (stronghold of the SSP supposedly) and has done for a while.
Comment by Mary Brooksbank — 18 June, 2009 @ 10:09 pm
In4mation what do you think the left in Scotland should do?
As for the meeting it had approx 40 folk at it.
Comment by Andy — 18 June, 2009 @ 10:35 pm
Post #18 Richie you incredibly stupid. That the BNP are racist fascists and thoroughly bad types is beyond dispute. My point is that the law in question is a bad law and that socialists ought not to defend it or seek to make use of it.
Comment by mike — 18 June, 2009 @ 10:54 pm
#27 - Mary (or is it Sarah?) surely if you write an article in the Weekly Worker which I thought was quite nasty and even vindictive (though well within your right to write it) you can only expect a response from atleast one SSP member. You can’t then bleat that you are “attacked”. If you begin a robust discussion you can only expect a robust response.
Comment by cat — 18 June, 2009 @ 11:05 pm
@mike, you don’t think socialists should defend or seek to use a law that makes it an offence to incite racial hatred? That’s not my idea of socialism.
Comment by Rich S — 18 June, 2009 @ 11:44 pm
#28 “What do you think the left in Scotland should do?”
Where the left in Scotland or anywhere is disunited it desperately needs to move on from old arguments about ultra-leftism and the taking up of intransigent stances determined by a form of moralist purism to address the central questions of exploitation, oppression, the impact of the credit crunch and the rise of electoral Nazism.
For me this means that those who come from a revolutionary Marxist background have to be putting their own arguments within some form of anti-capitalist party which stands in elections and provides a credible united left alternative to the mass of disillusioned voters.
However there is little value in forming a party characterised by the air of sectarian tension within all its meetings (a bit like the pages on this blog). For me, this tension was too often promoted (perhaps semi-concsciously) by the likes of the semi-hidden International Socialist Movement (ISM) organising faction who effectively controlled the leadership of the old SSP.
While any new party or formation would have some mass electoral focus there is little point in any revolutionary Marxists imposing their ideas in a top-down manner on others. Where revolutionary Marxists do form an organised current within any new radical left formation one of their main focuses should be promoting the discussion of revolutionary ideas while demonstrating solidarity in action.
In fact there is desperate need for revolutionary ideas which can fill the void left by the shift to the right of the mainstream parties.
However there would be little value in creating a party where these factions channel their energies into behind the scenes factional organising. An approach to what is left of the old SSP was maybe unlikely to be fruitful starting point for any left forces looking to build wider electoral unity in the current period.
Comment by inf4mation — 19 June, 2009 @ 12:07 am
The BBC need to be reminded of of their public duty. Many socialists, trade unionists and just ordinary people tried to phone in and complain. It is an aggravated offence in Scoltand to incite racial hatred, the BBC need to take responsibility.
Comment by cat — 19 June, 2009 @ 12:10 am
inf4mation:
Where revolutionary Marxists do form an organised current within any new radical left formation one of their main focuses should be promoting the discussion of revolutionary ideas while demonstrating solidarity in action.
Reply:
Truth is, sadly, that where revolutionary Marxists do form organised currents within radical left formations, it’s been the kiss of death.
Revolutionary Marxists have in fact played a key role in creating the space for the emergence of the far right as an anti-establishment alternative.
Comment by John Wight — 19 June, 2009 @ 12:23 am
Sandy
I am going to continue to delete further comments from you on this thread, just because they are so boring and Spart-like.
You have made your point. It is the same point that the ultra-left have been making for decades, with ever decreasing rewards or relevence.
I am sure there are plenty of other outlets who may be astounded at the novelty and wit of your position, This web-site is not the appropriate forum.
This is not censorship, this is editorial discretion. Consider my moderating role as being the chair of a meeting, saying, sorry comrade you have made your point, let’ us hear from the others now.
Comment by Andy Newman — 19 June, 2009 @ 9:43 am
Sandy
You are at liberty to go and start your own web-site, and promote your views there.
The Labour Party are clearly not to blame for the failure of those to the left of them to construct a viable political alternative to them. the squabbling, fractious and delusional far left are the authors of their own irrelevance. the very language of banging on about what “revolutionalrty marxists” should or should not do is part of the self-important mindset that is part of the problem.
Comment by Andy Newman — 19 June, 2009 @ 10:05 am
Andy I could understand your position if i had made numerous posts to this thread but i made one five line post and you deleted it due to its political content. How boring could my one five line post have been? Really I dont think you are telling the truth- even to yourself
sandy
Comment by Anonymous — 19 June, 2009 @ 10:28 am
#37
Sandy
You have been boring the pants off all of us for days with your repeated ultra-left commnts over a number of different debates.
Enough.
Comment by Andy Newman — 19 June, 2009 @ 10:29 am
Top man Eddie Truman!
If anyone is interested,
tonight on BBC Radio 4, Lib-Dem Rabbi Julia Nueberger is scheduled as a panellist on ‘Any Questions’.
I am hoping she will take the BBC to task on their soft-soaping the BNP, if the topic arises.
Any Questions
BBC Radio 4
Friday 20.00-20.50
19 June 2009
all the best SU
ps
Apologies for an earlier outburst Eddie.
Keep up the great work.
Comment by joe90kane — 19 June, 2009 @ 2:21 pm