The Griffin opposition speaks out...

There are two very interesting posts on fascist blogs at the moment, both of which are well worth taking a good look at. The first is on the North-West Nationalist site and was written by Adrian Davies, the second is on the dissident Enough is Enough blog.

Now is the winter of our discontent

As I write these words, it seems increasingly likely that Nick Griffin’s paranoia and unbridled lust for power (I said power, though it seems that he will also have his Gaveston!) are leading to the disintegration of his party.

If that does not happen in the next few weeks, and “the Leader” (as he likes to describe himself, capitalised as in the original German) somehow retains control of a few square miles of rubble strewn wilderness around the Welshpool bunker into 2008, it will happen in the next few months. The financial time bombs ticking away under the bunker are going to detonate soon, and that will be the end. That, however, is not my principal theme for to-day, though I must touch upon it. My good friend E. N. Ronn will be writing in depth about the saga of the BNP accounts shortly, so watch this space!

The immediate crisis has been precipitated by the latest purge of senior members who complained about the indecent influence of Mad King Nick’s (yes, I know that Gerry Gable thought of that title first, but why should the devil have all the best tunes?) current favourite, Mark “Young, Nazi and Proud” Collett, and asked awkward questions about the incompetence of the BNP treasurer John Walker and his deputy, ex-convict Dave Hannam, who are now well over five months late in filing the party’s 2006 accounts.

The real problem is not however the vain juvenile Collett, nor the criminal Hannam, nor the incompetent Walker, nor even the appalling Nick Griffin himself. In part it is the authoritarian constitution bequeathed to Griffin by John Tyndall, which allows Griffin to indulge his whims and caprices at will, and the culture of secrecy in which the members are treated like mushrooms by “the Leader” and his kitchen cabinet, who are not fit to run a whelk stall, let alone an organisation with an income of £672,246 in 2005, the last year for which it troubled to file accounts (not to mention an expenditure of £766,958!). In part however the problem is also the poverty of expectations in the movement, and the easy tolerance of sleaze and criminality by people who should know better, conniving at the arbitrary misuse of power and gross financial malpractice, while prating on about how they will save our country from a corrupt establishment. May heaven preserve England from such “saviours”!

At present, the stated position of the BNP dissidents is that they do not desire a new party, and seek reform from within. I can well understand their feelings. They have given years of their lives to build up the BNP, they have to deal with a membership that has a sentimental attachment to the name, while precedents from the National Party in 1976 to the Freedom Party in 2001 show how hard a task it is to build something new, as I know from personal experience.

The dissidents face two big problems if they persist in that course. The first is that under section 5 of the BNP’s constitution, “General Members’ Meetings may only be called by the National Chairman or by the Advisory Council in accordance with Section 5 of this Constitution”. Somehow I cannot imagine Nick Griffin or the leading light on his rump Advisory Council, his insinuating deputy, Simon Darby (an interesting if unattractive chimaera created by mingling the DNA of Grima Wormtongue, Martin Bormann and the Man who was Thursday in a government laboratory at Porton Down) agreeing to an EGM!

Secondly, the BNP is almost certainly bankrupt. I have said that the state of its accounts is not my principal theme, but I must outline the most glaring features to explain why I have come to that conclusion.

As the BNP’s auditors, Silvers, said in their report annexed to the 2005 accounts (more recent accounts are notoriously not available):

“ . . . for the last two years the party has incurred a deficit . . . the Balance Sheet is now in deficit, there is an element of doubt as to its ability to continue as a going concern. There are however funds available within the ‘Regional Accounting Unit’ . . . to rectify the situation.”

Indeed there were. Note 5 to the Regional Accounting Unit’s accounts for2006 (which, unlike the Central Accounting Unit’s, have been filed with the Electoral Commission), prepared by Dave Hannam (who is on the out for the time being) reads:

“At the end of the year, the party owed the regional accounting unit £21,854, and this was repaid by 26th January 2007.”

Put into plain English, head office dipped into branch funds to the tune of £21,854 to pay 2005's bills, then repaid that amount out of 2006's income. A problem with this tactic is that in the next year, you run out of money even sooner. Such practices are redolent of trading while insolvent. I wonder how much has been borrowed from branch funds to meet this year’s deficit? Is that why the 2006 accounts have not been filed?

When, shortly before his resignation from the BNP’s Advisory Council earlier this year, Jonathan Bowden asked Nick Griffin what economies he proposed to make to reduce the carried forward deficit, the answer came back “none”. The deficit would be funded by growth.

The BNP grew rapidly in the early years of this decade. >From a total of some 1,200 when Nick Griffin was elected chairman in 1999, membership rose to 6,008 or 6,502

(it is not clear which: both figures appear at different pages of the 2005 accounts!) in 2005. In passing, while Nick Griffin likes to claim the credit for such growth, it is largely the result of external factors, namely the leftward drift of the Tory party, the failure of UKIP to rebrand itself as a broadly based party of the populist right, and the reaction to massive immigration.

Since audited accounts are not available for any date after 31st December 2005, it is impossible to say what the current membership might be, but after disappointing results in the May 2007 local elections, it seems unlikely that growth will plug the gap.

Put bluntly, the BNP has operated much like a Ponzi scheme for many years, but now the new money is not coming in to pay the accumulated debts. Soon the music will have to stop.

Interesting though I as a lawyer might find the question how far incoming members of the committee of management of an unincorporated association are liable for debts contracted by their predecessors, I somehow doubt that there will be a rush of volunteers to defend a test case brought by disgruntled creditors! Yet that would be the likely position of anyone taking over the leadership of the BNP from Nick Griffin.

It appears therefore to follow that at some point in the not too distant future (though possibly not for so long as Griffin and Walker can avoid filing accounts for 2006) the stark reality of insolvency will compel even the reluctant to consider a fresh start (and even leave them with no practical alternative).

Significant advantages can be obtained from such a scenario, which now seems much more likely than a week ago. Not only will Nick be left to pay the debts that he contracted, as is only fair and right, but also the problematic baggage that the BNP carries can be jettisoned. Never again will sensible patriots have to answer awkward questions about the role in their party of Lecomber or Collett.

Certain measures will have to be taken. The first will be to form a broadly based committee to run a new party till elections to its governing body take place. It would seem sensible to allow six to nine months before holding elections, to build up the membership, and allow a meaningful vote for a representative committee.

The second will be to agree a platform for the party that is neither so bland as to fail to put clear red, white and blue water between us and, say, UKIP or the Cornerstone group of Tory M.P.s, while not being so radical as to lead us into the political wilderness so beloved of purists, fantasists and fanatics of the left and right.

A draft constitution would have to be put to the members at the first general members’ meeting. Such a constitution should provide for the holding once a year of a general

meeting of the members, who alone should have the power to amend the constitution and the statement of aims, and to appoint the members of internal disciplinary tribunals, so that the chairman or governing body cannot pack them. The constitution should also require the officers to lay accounts, prepared by the treasurer, and passed by a registered external auditor before the members in general meeting for approval.

Rid of the albatross legacy of “Young, Nazi and Proud”, “the Secret Agent” etc. ad infinitum et ad nauseam, and committed to a sensible tactical doctrine of building up from the grassroots by engagement in local elections, not fantasies about getting onto the Brussels gravy train, such a party will quickly occupy the large electoral space created by the leftward drift of PC Dave’s Tories, and the abject failure of UKIP to capitalise on the long lost opportunities of 2004.

Now is the time for all true patriots to take a principled yet practical stand. Adherence to the embattled Welshpool clique is not only immoral, it is now also impolitic. Continued support for Griffin amidst accounting scandals and raids by illegal goon squads on the homes of democratically elected councillors equates to moral leprosy, and political suicide.

Over the coming weeks and months, we shall see who does the right thing, who does the wrong thing, and who sits on the fence to see which side will prevail. What will you do?

Wretched and rebellious

Nick Griffin’s latest posting on the website does nothing to enhance his reputation for telling the truth. While the GLA elections are indeed a massive opportunity for the BNP, his attempts to describe the circumstances surrounding the last seven days smack of utter desperation.

To suggest that ‘far-left’ embedded assets have emerged to cause this crisis, when all people have tried to do is awaken you to real and dangerous problems within, is playing a very dangerous political game. It seems that the bigger the crisis, the bigger the smear that has to be told to get yourself out of it. Nonetheless, there is no better response to this than to tell the truth.

In conjunction with the above, some serious questions need to be asked:

• Why has Mark Collett been able to cause trouble wherever he has gone, while you have taken his side on every instance which has led to the sacking or smearing of hard working and well respected Nationalists?
• Why has Dave Hannam been allowed to keep his job for such a long time despite clearly not being up to it, and despite serious reservations from many Party officials?
• Why was the expulsion and treatment of Sadie Graham and Kenny Smith broadcast on the website for 10,000 visitors a day to read that the BNP illegally records people’s conversations and enters their homes by deception while stealing personal property?
• Why are extracts from that personal property then added to that website, in full view of the public at large?
• Why are you now going round the country accusing others of being state assets, when you know full well that those you are accusing have literally given years of honest hard graft to the Cause?

Your revelation about a ‘palace coup’ is nothing more than an inept and incorrect justification for you to rid the Party of those people who have criticised Mark Collett. People before have criticised Mark, and those people are now gone, yet not without being smeared by you as either a ‘red’ or having stolen money. The larger the degree to which Mark dislikes the said people, the larger the smear used against them.

The suggestion that ‘the little clique’ wanted to remove power from the leader, the members who elect the leader and the voting members is nothing more than a lie designed to get those said people on board by deceptively suggesting that all of you as Chairman, the Voting Members, and the members in general are all being undermined together. Chris Beverley was voted to be the Councillors Representative at the latest annual Conference, by existing Councillors. This would have given him a place on the AC, which comes with that position. At the latest North West Regional Council meeting (not the stage managed hatchet job last week) Chris Jackson was given overwhelming backing by the North West Officials (no-one voted against him) to be the North West Regional Organiser. However you have not honoured this and you have instead installed yourself as the North West RO. Both Chris Beverley and Chris Jackson can’t exactly be described as Mark Collett fans, yet they are both excellent Organisers and dedicated Nationalists. To suggest that these two people, democratically elected by their peers meant filling the AC with people to undermine you is ludicrous. How then do you explain the fact that Ian Dawson turned down the role of Yorkshire Organiser (and thus a place on the AC) when according to your theory, Ian, as another Collett non-fan, would surely have jumped at the chance to be back on the AC?

Greed? Insecurity? Juvenile arrogance? A secret extremist agenda? Knowing that their own failings are about to catch up with them? A more perfect description of Mark Collett surely does not exist.

A ‘very productive meeting in the North West’? Where three well respected and hard working long term Nationalists, who were also Regional Officials, resigned? Where you had the room to yourself to show off your undoubted skills as a politician and political debater without your scandalous and desperate claims to be properly challenged?

Glasgow – there was no unanimous vote at all, the Organiser and the Fund-Holder have resigned in protest at your handling of a situation that would never have developed had you lanced the Mark Collett boil on the numerous occasions presented to you over the years. No doubt your ‘one side of the story only’ road show will enable you to win over more people who ‘can’t see the wood for the trees’, yet the truth always comes out and you reap what you sow.

Your tale of badgering phone calls is astounding! It is you and your various lieutenants that have been making calls, spreading lies and badgering officials not to resign in protest. To do the deed and then falsely accuse others of doing it is about as low as it gets. When you’re in a hole……

Which activists were turned away from the smart and friendly pub venue (the first pub you went to after being aquitted at Leeds Crown Court) used for the openly advertised social meeting in Bradford? The thirty plus people in the meeting did not include wretched women, in fact there were no wretched women in the pub at all. Those present were men and women who pay their membership fees so that you and your ‘advisers’ can lie about them to 10,000 visitors a day on the BNP website.

Angela Clarke was in the pub at the time, though not as it happens in the ‘rebel meeting room’. The suggestion that Angela is a wretched woman shows the utter hatred you have for anyone who dares to ask the wrong questions about Mark Collett. Angela was an exceptionally brave BNP councillor who literally fought on the front line in the town of Keighley. She endured more than anyone yet you gave such little support. When you sent Mark Collett in to protect her (the sheer irony of it all) all she received was a computer filled with perverse pornography to which when questioned about it, Collett’s reply was “so f***ing what, it is for my own personal viewing”. The fall out that followed was once again handled with the same trusted method – that of smearing Angela and defending Mark Collett.

Mark Collett, while now given the title of ‘Head of Graphic Design’, was never more than this anyway. Martin Wingfield design and produces Voice of Freedom (and does a fantastic job), John Bean is the editor for Identity (and does a fantastic job) – Mark Collett only ever did the layout and pictures. Steve Blake was in charge of the website (and did a fantastic job even though he was never taken on full time and had to fit it around a non-BNP job). You wrote the information for the national leaflets; Mark Collett only did the graphic design for those leaflets. The only Publicity that Mark Collett has ever been head of is ‘Bad Publicity’. Despite the change of title, Mark will be doing exactly as before and more, now that he has been given the role as editor of the British Nationalist bulletin.

We understand the ‘road show’ was in Leicestershire yesterday afternoon – the outcome of the meeting for Sadie to remain as a normal member was far from satisfactory. She has not only lost her job and her income in the run up to Christmas while pregnant, her personal possessions have not been returned (including her personal computer) despite you accepting at the meeting that the BNP computer you thought you had taken is still in Sadie’s possession. Therefore you have been trawling through Sadie’s private computer given to her by her father, when you knew full well that this was the case. You have thus broken the law of the land by the dissemination of (whether true or amended for your own agenda) Sadie’s personal information. You are in boiling hot water and you damn well know it.

Meetings in the New Year won’t be about listening to the BNP answers; they will be about listening to your answers. Yet Nick, this is the British National Party, not the Nick Griffin Party.

You make so many predictions and cover so many angles, that whatever is to happen you can link it in with past predictions to suit your immediate requirements. Great politician, great political speaker and debater, yet that alone will not take us to the finish line.