Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time has provoked a huge amount of controversy. The BBC, along with members of the BNP, have argued that as the BNP acquired two seats in the European parliament it deserved to have its say on one of the main political programmes in the UK; after all, the BBC’s broadcasting mandate requires it to give equal prominence to political parties above a given level of representation.

However, Nick Griffin represents a different breed of politician. Griffin was a former member of the right wing supremacist group ‘The National Front’, and he is the first person to be allowed on Question Time who has been investigated for inciting racial hatred.

BY JANE BROWN

The BNP, who try to label themselves as a legitimate political party, recently came under attack from the Equality Commission who found that the party “appeared to discriminate on the grounds of race and colour, contrary to the Race Relations Act.” Indeed, Home Secretary Alan Johnson stated that, “These people believe in the things that the fascists believed in the Second World War, they believe in what the National Front believe in. They believe in the purity of the Aryan race.” He brought to attention that since the BNP has now acknowledged that its constitution is illegal because it refuses to admit black and Asian people as members; the BBC should not consider it a legitimate political party and thus the BNP should not have been accorded the right to publicity on Question Time.

Nevertheless, Griffin’s appearance on Question Time on Thursday 22^nd of October showed him up as a political lightweight and it was clear that he underestimated the tide of revulsion against him and his party. He was booed and jeered by the audience as he took his seat, and one audience member even went as far as to label him “a pathetic bigot.” Even fellow panellist Jack Straw refused to shake his hand before the show.

It must be noted, however that a controversial appearance on Question Time will not change the fact that the BNP will remain nothing more than an extremist party on the fringe of British politics. Even in the midst of one of the worst recessions in eighty years and an expenses scandal that rocked the political core of Britain, the BNP could only garner a small percentage of the vote.

On Thursday evening over five hundred anti-fascist demonstrators dominated the media spotlight, just hours before the BBC would broadcast Question Time with Nick Griffin on the panel. This highly contentious decision has split public opinion, and divided politicians on whether this far right fascist party should be given a platform to air their heavily criticized odious views. Despite the efforts of the protestors, the BBC refused to intervene to stop the recording of the program. They issued a statement claiming the recording would go ahead  as the BBC “are obliged to treat all legal political parties registered with the electoral commission with due impartiality”.

BY AOIFE MORRISON

In a hysterical reaction, the ever swelling number of protestors stormed an entrance of the BBC studio in West London where, as a consequence, despite the presence of over seven hundred metropolitan police officers, twenty five people breached security and entered into the main lobby. The Metropolitan Police have since issued a statement claiming that they have made three arrests, two of which were for violent disorder.

Given the extent of this passionate protest, one can conclude that members of the British public from all race backgrounds, all religious or non religious groups, young and old generations, are all united in their distaste at the BBC’s arguably shameful act.

However has the BBC taken a step too far? The U.K prides itself in being a model example of a liberal democracy where the electoral voice of its citizens must be represented. Since June 2009 the BNP have secured two MEPs and one member of the London Assembly. This victory was achieved within the democratic system and as a consequence of claiming six percent of the electorate vote, gaining almost one million votes.

Therefore the argument to exclude this rising political party from political debate has been called into question. Without doubt, the BNP’s policies are distastefully racist and this was recognized by London County Courts when the Human Rights Commission sought an injunction on the BNP’s membership policy, which outlined “Indigenous Caucasians” only worthy of recruitment.

There is a fine line between freedom of expression and constraining offensive views, yet the BNP play within the democratic game and thus are entitled to their share of freedom of expression. To deny this right would be simply detrimental to liberal democracy.

In the words of Roy Greenslade, “Censorship does not remove prejudice, it drives it underground, a greater threat to democracy than reading and listening to offensive points of view.”