One burnt-out Griffin - free if taken away

Five Reasons Why Nick Griffin Should Step Down

By P Andrews

Posted by admin on Jun 18th, 2011 to Andrew Brons' BNP Ideas web site.

Nick Griffin should step down as leader of the British National Party for five important reasons: financial mismanagement; the disastrous Question Time appearance; appalling staff appointments; electoral reversals and the deliberate lies over the party conference’s constitutional mandate.

Had the leader of any other political party committed just one of these “mistakes,” he or she would have stood down with immediate effect.

To take responsibility for one’s mistakes is the sign of maturity and honesty.

What are the details of these five major mistakes?

1. Nick Griffin has presided over years of appalling financial mismanagement which has blackened the party’s name with suppliers across the country, misspent vast sums on avoidable court cases and legal expenses, and has resulted in official censures from auditors and the Electoral Commission (EC).

In December 2010, the Electoral Commission ruled that the party had broken funding laws. The only reason why Nick Griffin was not prosecuted personally was because the EC said it “lacked sufficient powers.” This has since been changed and new rules will allow prosecutions.

The EC’ s ruling was, by the way, in relation to the 2008 accounts, which were submitted in 2010 (!), an omission for which the party’s members had to pay a fine of £1,000.

The debt situation which occurred on Nick Griffin’s watch would by itself be cause for resignation, if not prosecution under laws governing fiduciary duty to an unincorporated association’s members.

Any political party leader who let his party’s affairs develop into such a crisis would have accepted responsibility for this mess and would have stepped down by now.

This situation is intolerable and denotes gross incompetence. The true position of the party’s finances are still unknown, despite the arrival of two large legacies which have been entirely and unjustly swallowed up into a yawning black hole.

Members are entitled to call to account the leader as the sole custodian of the party’s assets. That is essential if confidence is to be restored.

The national leader should also explain what expertise he holds to oversee the party’s finances and business affairs.

2. The disastrous Question Time appearance, which saw the party’s best chance to present itself positively to the public was a shameful performance which allowed the party to be portrayed as of low-grade political acumen.

The party’s electoral decline is directly linked to the Question Time appearance, as since then election results have plummeted.

It is no excuse to say that Question Time was a “set-up.” Of course it was.

But Nick Griffin should have been prepared for that, and answered criticisms directly and with aggression, instead of meekly laughing at himself and humiliating the party with a truly shockingly poor performance.

Some 9 million viewers tuned into Question Time, intrigued by the party’s election of two MEPs. They tuned in expecting to see a lion, instead they saw a mouse.

The electoral results since then have told the tale.

Any political party leader who “dropped the ball” so badly would have taken responsibility for his actions and would have stood down by now.

3. Appalling staffing choices which have seen non-members and even hostile elements placed in charge of critical financial and party management roles, with clear evidence of nepotism to boot.

These individuals who, for the most part, are without any outside experience, have cut a swathe of destruction through party ranks and morale.

It is no good blaming the individuals in question: all of them, bar none, were given their authority by Nick Griffin. The buck stops with the party leader, and no-one else.

Good, hardworking and loyal nationalists were pushed aside for Nick Griffin’s personal friends, even though these people were not even members of the party or, in some cases, were even members of opposition parties.

In addition to this, Nick Griffin expelled other hardworking nationalists and chased them into other parties by simply offering them no choice.

At the same time, he retained his own non-party advisors and employees, and then hypocritically attacked those whom he had thrown out of the party, suspended or alienated for joining alternative groups.

There is plenty of good talent within the ranks of the party. Yet these people have been shunted aside while Nick Griffin has appointed his unqualified friends.

Any political party leader who had caused such chaos with poor staffing appointments, mismanagement and hypocrisy, would have stood down by now.

4. Poor election results. Although the party leadership pretends to claim otherwise (and invents excuses such as the increase in parish councillors), the reality is that the party has not won a single new seat since Question Time.

On the contrary, the party’s vote has dropped dramatically in every contested seat and has been humiliated twice in a row by UKIP in former party heartlands such as Oldham and Barnsley.

This compares vividly with the situation just a few years ago, where the BNP would easily beat UKIP even in the former’s “home territory” of Henley.

There has never been a party in British political history which has suffered such severe electoral reverses where the leader has not taken personal responsibility and stood down.

5. The twisting and distortion of the constitutional mandate given by the December 2010 conference. The “amendments” proposed by Nick Griffin bear no relation whatsoever to the mandate given to him by the December conference, even though he has shamelessly claimed the contrary.

Any party leader caught out in such blatant dishonesty to the membership would have stood down with immediate effect.

This is not a personal issue. It relates to the salvation of the party and, therefore, the future of the nation. Twelve years as leader of the British National Party is long enough, too long in fact, and the results in recent years are evident all around.

The appalling deterioration in the state of the party’s propaganda organs (the website, the party newspaper and magazine) are testament to the fact that the party is not employing its best talent and brains.

The impossible micro-management of the party’s detailed affairs, the collapse in activist numbers, ever-increasing numbers of dissenters, a falling membership base and a downward slide in electoral results, all tell the tale which is obvious for all except the willingly blind, to see.

It is worth repeating: Any one of the five major mistakes would have been reason enough for a “normal” party leader to have resigned.

The British National Party should be no different.