Why has the Police Federation allowed the BNP to co-opt them? (UPDATE)

Share This

Hugh Muir reports:

And while we are continuing police inquiries, what do we know following their famous march on London? The event itself was peaceful; the least we could expect, but why was Richard Barnbrook, the BNP mayoral candidate for London and “visionary artist” allowed to take a prominent place at the front? Many forces ban their officers from membership of the BNP, as does the Association of Chief Police Officers. Brian Paddick, the Liberal Democrat candidate and former deputy assistant commissioner at the Met, raised the issue with the organisers, who proceeded – in an orderly fashion – to do nothing. Yesterday BNPtv posted its lengthy footage of Barnbrook interviewing a federation official from Essex police. The disreputable in league with the disgruntled. Hard to know which is worse.

You can watch the film on YouTube. Barnbrook can clearly be seen at the front of the demonstration along with the police’s other high profile supporters (including Susan Kramer, although she seems to have put as much distance between him and her as possible) while the Secretary of the Essex Police Federation Roy Scane (and there is no way a policeman with such a role could possibly not know who Barnbrook is) happily gives Barnbrook an extended interview.

This is of course exactly the kind of tacit approval that the BNP crave. Is the Police Federation nuts?

It’s good to see Brian Paddick’s political radar in full working order however.

UPDATE: The Evening Standard has more on this. How about this for a pathetic/vaguely sinister excuse from the Police Federation:

“Some of my colleagues saw we had the BNP Mayoral candidate with us. The one thing we want to make clear is we didn’t invite him. It wasn’t a closed march. He chose to attend by his own accord which is his right in a democracy. It is disappointing if anyone chose to join the march for their own agenda.

“We didn’t ask him to leave because whether we like it or not we live in a democracy.”

In a democracy you certainly can refuse to allow an individual to lead a public demonstration from the front. You simply ask him to leave. I somehow doubt even the BNP would be uncooperative with a crowd of 22,000 coppers. And you are certainly not required to provide him with a friendly interview with one of your regional officials.

And what’s with this ambivalence about living in a democracy? Are they on a mission to lose public sympathy?

9 thoughts on “Why has the Police Federation allowed the BNP to co-opt them? (UPDATE)

  1. My “illiberal” attitude that organisations that represent the Police, a public service that everyone depends on for defending the public interest regardless of whether a criminal or victim is a member of an ethnic minority, should take steps to ensure it is not associated with a racist organisation?

    You call that illiberal? But then, since you call yourself inverted world, perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised if you come across a bit Bizarro.

  2. You haven’t a leg to stand on, the Police ‘service’ itself is institutionally racist we are told (though by racist reasoning).

    You cannot seriously expect an organisation which endorses a ‘National Black Police Association’ and its many local chapters; whose CEO was found guilty of racial discrimination at an employment tribunal for seeking to make a particular example of white officers but escaped discipline; and which was prosecuted successfully for racial discrimination against whites in its recruitment policies to NOT be racist. But then you don’t want it be – as long as it’s racist against whites.

    The questions for you, JG are all about your objectivity and liberal stance.

    Did you attack the police when they flouted the LAW in ways which happened to harm innocent whites?

    Will you permit peoples happening to be white to pursue a politics of ethnic survival?

    Would you have whined if a member of Operation Black Vote had joined the march?

    Are only people who agree with on every issue entitled to a political voice?

    If race doesn’t matter why is it the only issue that ‘liberals’ want to silence dissident voices on?

  3. Oh dear. You are obviously a very sad and racist person.

    You forgot to mention the Police’s links to Common Purpose by the way. Or Zeta Reticuli.

  4. Hence “inverted world”: to ask a liberal to treat all races equally and defend the rights of peoples to survive as such is ‘racist’.

  5. With regards to racism, I can only say that I am glad it is us who define the rules and set the goal posts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.