YouGov have a poll in tomorrow’s Telegraph, the first since Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time. It was carried out late yesterday and all day today. There isn’t actually very much detail in the Telegraph’s report, but there’s more at ConservativeHome.

The topline voting intentions, with changes from the poll last weekend, are CON 40%(-1), LAB 27%(-3), LDEM 19%(+2), BNP 3%(+1). So while the BNP support is up, it is nothing significant. 2-3% has been pretty much the norm for their support over the last couple of months, and the most recent YouGov/Telegraph poll at the end of September also had them at 3%. For the other parties, Labour are down from the 30% to 27%, more in line with the ICM and Ipsos MORI figures in the week. YouGov still have the Conservatives down at 40% in comparison to 44% and 43% from ICM and MORI.

Anyway, the poll will really be looked at for evidence of how the BNP’s Question Time appearance has gone down, rather than the main parties. As well as voting intention, YouGov asked whether people had positive or negative opinions of the smaller parties – questions that it last asked in June straight after the European elections. Back then 11% of people had a positive impression of the BNP and 72% a negative impression, today’s figures are 9% positive and 71% negative, so no sign of any improvement in people’s opinion of the BNP either. Despite all the hoohah and protests, despite the millions of people who watched Question Time, it doesn’t seem to have made any significant difference to how the public view them, or how likely they are to support them (or at least, not yet).

Asked how likely people would be to vote BNP in a future local, general or European election. 66% said there were no circumstances at all, 15% said it was “possible”, which I suspect is more of a “never say never answer”. More significant are the 7% who would definitely or probably consider voting BNP at some point in the future.

What has changed was attitudes to the BBC’s decision to invite Griffin onto Question Time. At the weekend 63% thought it was right, 23% wrong. Now the balance of opinion has shifted further in favour of the BBC’s decision, 74% thinking it was right, and only 11% wrong.


96 Responses to “YouGov verdict on BNP’s Question Time”

1 2
  1. Since I follow the Scottish results, I’m also puzzled at the 30% Other Paper that Oldnat pointed out. That doesn’t even seem possible. 2.5 times the rest of the UK? I’m no statistical anorak but that is strange.

    There are certainly differences in Scotland and the rest of the UK but it does make one question if there isn’t a problem with Scottish weighting.

  2. Oldnat,

    Would the FT not be better grouped with Grauniad/Independent than with Times/Telegraph?

    FT doesnt really fit into either category – it is not as leftist as the Grauniad or Indy, but definitely not as right wing as the Telegraph, or even the Times either. I think it leans more to the left than the right.

  3. Possible ICM poll in N of the World. They mention large Con lead but article so far mainly about immigration & the BNP.

  4. Neil

    That’s the YouGov groupings – not mine.

  5. Anthony,

    I can’t believe you’re correct with your “I expect the Herald and Scotsman are actually included with similar English papers for weighting purposes too”. Given their pro-Labour bias, the only possible comparison would be with the Indy/Grauniad group yet the YouGov weighting for that is only 2% vs 5% for the whole island.

    Unless it already includes the Herald and Scotsman, other is probably much too high, with the Courier and the P&J having barely a third of the Record’s 350,000 circulation between them.

  6. Brownedov

    I’d correct the “pro-Labour” to pro-Union – less so in the Herald’s case. But in reality these broadsheets are essentially regional in nature with the Scotsman predominant on the East Coast, and the Herald on the West. It’s difficult to believe that either correlates with political leanings – other than with the underlying East/West political split – which is far too disparate to allow accurate placement of either within the English spectrum.

    It also seems unlikely to me that you could place a sliver of silicone enhancement between the readers of the Record and the Scottish Sun.

  7. Oldnat,

    I accept pro-Union but as they’re not mad enough to suggest voting Tory it comes to much the same thing. I agree they’re regional, but not sure what that would help to measure.

    LOL re “sliver of silicone enhancement” but isn’t that exactly what Mr Murdoch’s new policy is trying to do?

  8. ICM poll in News of the World:

    The paper, citing the poll, claims that:
    (a) “almost two-thirds think mainstream parties have no credible policies on immigration”
    (b) “one third believe British-born people from ethnic minorities should lose all state benefits, including NHS treatment”
    (c) “narrow majorities oppose the teaching of gay and straight sex in schools”
    (c) “44% say white working class people have been abandoned”.

  9. Andy Stidwill

    (the previous Tele makes me think of you as bald, sucking lollipops and solving crimes in 70s New York!)

    ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 504 adults on 23-24th October 2009. …

    Don’t think I want to put much credence on that.

  10. @PeteB

    “It is a fact that 23% of live births in this country in 2007 were to foreign-born mothers (National Office of Statistics). The majority of immigrants are concentrated in big cities – latest figures for London are 54% of births are to women born outside the UK. Colour of skin is irrelevant.

    Does it make someone a racist to be a little concerned about this?”

    Yes, it does.

    Those stats are utterly irrelevant to anything.

  11. @BenM.

    Really? I think you’re probably slightly out of tune with the feelings of the average voter there.

    If being “a little concerned” about the fact that England is going to be buried under new housing, due to an unprecedented rise in population caused by immigration and the associated increase in birthrate, makes you a racist then no wonder the BNP vote is rising.

    It was interesting to me that all of the panellists on QT used the expression “Of course we don’t want to pull up the drawbridge and stop all immigration” when I suspect if the public were polled on that question a large minority, possibly a majority, would answer “Yes we do”.

  12. Err, that should be “all of the panellists except Griffin” of course.

  13. Trevorsden that link makes my blood boil. But it makes sense: Labour could not rely on native British people to consistently win elections and since immigrants overwhelmingly vote Labour they flooded the country with immigrants in order to ensure more votes for Labour. Simon Heffer wrote that some time ago when he said Labour did it on purpose, that link just proves it to be the case. I can only call it treason.

  14. Anthony

    Political discussion – even if only loosely related to polling – is fine.

    But if it’s going to be a site that accepts racist propaganda , I’m off.

  15. BenM

    It is indeed relevant .

    , MPs Nicholas Soames and Frank Field, chairmen of the cross party group for balanced migration, said the UK was “on course for an unsustainable and unacceptable rise in population”.

    That is why it is relevant.
    That is why Immigration ranks only behind the economy in people’s concerns.

    It is people like you with your politically correct censorship of discussion on this hugely important subject who are driving support for BNP.

    On QT it is beyond me why Griffin didn’t press this point home. It was the one topic on which he would have gained support.

    Why did he not ask the simple question of the other panelists-” How many people is too many-or do you think population density & it’s attendant infrastucture requirements is of no concern?”

  16. Andy – it did, though it really isn’t comparable. See my comment at 9:39am

    Bobby A – they didn’t, they were grouped with all the minor parties as usual. I just mentioned them in particular in my analysis because it was interesting what the effect of Question Time would be on their support. YouGov put them with the minor parties as usual in the survey.

    Brownedov – looking at Oldnat’s figures I think you’re right. It must be the Record put with the Mirror and the Herald & Scotsman in as Others.

  17. Anthony

    If, as I suggest, there is no demonstrable political link between the tabloids in Scotland and voting patterns – simply an assumed extrapolation from English patterns onto Scotland, then YouGov has problems.

    It doesn’t matter for UK polls but if you are weighting by newspaper readership and 65% of the sample is weighted inappropriately for Scotland (30% others + 15% Sun/Star + 20% Record) then the commercial worth of your Scottish polling seems to be severely compromised.

  18. More bad news for Brown: it is being reported that the UK economy has been overtaken by Italy’s.

  19. Oldnat – the purpose of the newspaper weighting is largely an attitudinal thing – broadsheet vs tabloid. It isn’t intended as political weighting, which party ID handles.

    Really though, Scottish polling isn’t my thing (hence why my reports on Scottish polling figures are normally no more than a dry relaying of the figures) – you probably want to drop Peter Kellner a note.

  20. Thanks Anthony

  21. Anthony,

    Thanks for the response. If indeed you want “broadsheet vs tabloid” weighting then for all their faults the Herald and the Scotsman should certainly be counted as broadsheet, but definitely more Grauniad/Indy than Thunderer/Torygraph.

  22. Anthony – please remove the annoying ad that comes up when I come onto this site. It cannot be deleted for 5-10 seconds. Are you really needing the extra money?

  23. David E. Jones

    “BBC 24 and SKY News have been hammering home all day the 22% ‘could possibly’ voting figure for the BNP, rather than the actual 3%. It makes you wonder what the General Election coverage is going to be like?”

    I wonder if this will actually have the effect of increasing the BNP vote? The fact that over 20% of voters could possibly consider voting BNP might make it seem more respectable to some, and thus translate possible votes into actuals? I would stress that I am not a BNP supporter, it just seems to be the most interesting aspect of the polls and political scene generally lately.

    Oldnat
    “Political discussion – even if only loosely related to polling – is fine.
    But if it’s going to be a site that accepts racist propaganda , I’m off.”

    Perhaps I’m getting old myself but I couldn’t see any racist propaganda in any of the posts. How can concern that your culture could be swamped and your country vastly over-populated be considered racist? Are the Welsh racist for wanting to preserve their own culture? Or the Scots? Why is it that only the English are not allowed to have an identity? I echo Neil A’s point that if to be concerned about your own cultural identity is considered racist, then it is no wonder that BNP support is rising.

  24. Pete B

    Perhaps you don’t log on to many blogs.

    Nicholas’s post above is exactly the same BNP garbage as is being posted across the English/UK blogosphere, though I haven’t seen it on a single Scottish site so far.

    “How can concern that your culture could be swamped and your country vastly over-populated be considered racist?”

    Your country is only marginally more “over-populated” than the Netherlands. Your country contains one of the world’s great cities. It’s not an English or a British city, it’s an international city like New York. Revel in it! It’s one of the most exciting places to be!

  25. @ OldNat – “Your country is only marginally more “over-populated” than the Netherlands. ”

    That’s far too overpopulated for my liking. And I don’t think the issue of population – which is to do with quality of life, sustainability, and the environment – should be tied to BNP politics. It’s perfectly possible to be an advocate for population reduction without being a ranting racist – as David Attenborough could testify.

  26. PETE B

    “Are the Welsh racist for wanting to preserve their own culture? Or the Scots? Why is it that only the English are not allowed to have an identity? ”

    Good question.

    England has a population density which ranks 4th in the world if you exclude small islands & enclaves, & places like Vatican City.

    It is 3 times the density of Wales and 6 times the density of Scotland .It is more dense than India.

    And according to ONS it will grow by 10 million more people over the next 24 years on current trends.

    Half of this rise will be due to future immigration, and the other half included the high birth rates associated with past immigration.

    Of course this is a concern in England.

    If OLDNAT understood these matters properly he would understand why we have the BNP & he doesn’t-but I,m sure that won’t stop him in the Scottish Nationalist’s favourite passtime-preaching & pontificating.

  27. James Ludlow :-

    ” the issue of population – which is to do with quality of life, sustainability, and the environment ”

    Absolutely spot on.

    It is the exponential growth of the human population which is destroying this planet-something that no one-least of all the Greens-ever wants to talk about.

  28. @Oldnat,

    Having living in London most of my life until a couple of years ago, I absolutely agree that it is a wonderful and exciting place and that it owes a lot of that to immigration. However it is also a massively overcrowded place, and its expansion has destroyed a great number of very beautiful places around it.

    Although many immigrants move to London and stay there, many subsequently move on to other parts of the UK. Also, there is a massive flight of Londoners both to the surrounding commuter towns and to other parts of the UK. Whether they are leaving because they are racist or because they want their children to grow up in something bigger than a 1 bedroom flat is hard to know, but the effect of this outflow is that much of England is lost to new development in order to provide housing for them.

    Personally, I care deeply about the physical environment of my country. Where I live, we have numerous beautiful hillsides with stunning views across valleys, moors and coast. Most of them are buried under unspeakably ugly concrete housing that is the legacy of past population booms. Whenever I drive past a new development that has killed forever a piece of English countryside I feel literally heartsick. I suggest you zoom in and out on Google earth and see just how close the edges of English conurbations are coming to each other already.

    I have been to the Netherlands. It is basically one large city, and apart from the preserved centre of Amsterdam, mostly grotesquely ugly. One thing that struck me as I took the train from Den Haag to Amsterdam was that although sometimes there was a field on my left, and sometimes there was a field on my right, there didn’t ever seem to be a stretch of “open countryside” with fields on both sides of the tracks. Thanks, but no thanks.

    For me the argument over immigration is, and always has been, summed up by the slogan “Space, Not Race”.

  29. @NeilA

    “It was interesting to me that all of the panellists on QT used the expression “Of course we don’t want to pull up the drawbridge and stop all immigration” when I suspect if the public were polled on that question a large minority, possibly a majority, would answer “Yes we do””

    Which is why the political class is correct to ignore the ignorant ravings of a large minority of the electorate.

    Makes me glad we live in a liberal parliamentary democracy where minorities are defended from such warped, selfish, indulgent, press-driven views.

    @ Colin

    “It is indeed relevant .

    , MPs Nicholas Soames and Frank Field, chairmen of the cross party group for balanced migration, said the UK was “on course for an unsustainable and unacceptable rise in population”.

    That is why it is relevant.”

    That doesn’t prove it is relevant at all. This is just the opinion of a single group of MPs. I support Labour and happen to think Mr Field is wrong – and danerously so.

    Kids born to so-called “foreign” mothers will – the vast majority of cases – become excellent British citizens.

    That is why the stat is utterly irrelevant.

  30. BENM-
    In your opinion-is there an upper limit to the number of people who can co-exist comfortably in this country-Yes or No.

    If Yes-how many?

  31. Immigration is controllable and we shouldn’t forget that those who emigrate white British or not, reduce the population. I’d like to think that more of those who say Britain is “finished” (not least the BNP) would do so as well as all those higher earners who say that they would leave if they were taxed more.

    Higher reproductive rates of recent immigrants are nothing to worry about. Historically they align with the host population in two generations. Ghettoisation probably delays this.

    Fundamentalism and bigotry of any sort, religious, political, feminist, vegetarian or multiculturalist are a danger, but the key to opposing them – freedom of speech – has been understood for centuries.

    We need to be open and inclusive. The Founding Principles of the Scottish Parliament and its procedures and standards are designed to promote these values

  32. Anthony:

    It isn’t “Analysis” of either sort that bothers me, it’s just the questions.

    The answers are no problem either if the questions are clear.

    I’ve moaned before about not knowing what country I was in. With a pragmatic non-doctrinaire workaholic minister in charge of the NHS system I use, and formerly worked in, I am very happy about “the way things are going” in the Scottish NHS and when my wife was lying on a trolley in an A&E treatment room a couple of weeks ago I was very glad I was living in Scotland.

    I have often “… considered voting for the [Conservative] party …” because there is usualy one (or someting like it) on the ballot paper.

    Sure, I consider it, but always come up with the same answer. I can imagine circumstances when I might even do it, but these special circumstances havn’t happened yet, and it is very unlikely that they ever will in my lifetime in my constituency.

  33. Given what has happened, your point about the BNP becoming more respectable to vote for is a good one; they certainly seem to be making huge gains, particularly from the traditional working-class Labour voters.
    I wonder though, whether UKIP will see an opportunity to sweep up the ‘respectable’ protest and ultimately be the party that really gains from all of this?

  34. @Pete B

    Pete – having problems with this CAPTCHA code: the above comment was a reply to your helpful contribution.

  35. OLDNAT

    Your point about the press north of the central belt raises consideration of aspects far more important than the editorial position of the P&J or indeed the too-obvious anti-SNP stance of The Scotsman.

    Of necessity, weighting by large circulation newspaper readership is all that is available to pollsters, but it may not be where voters get the information that influences them most.

    Local newspapers such as The Oban Times or The Buteman and the Stornoway Gazette usually do not overtly take a party line, but there are now two other kinds of print sources which may be more influential in the part of Scotland where the SNP and the SLD’s have their regional strengths.

    The newer of these is the community freesheet printed on someone’s home computer. If there is no local issue of importance, these publications have no influence on elections. If, however, there is a controversial local issue, in all probability there will be an articulate local activist who is better informed, more committed, and focused on only that issue who will put his or her case and not be shy about exposing the shortcomings of candidates who are in less than full agreement.

    I would expect the Trump proposal to provoke much debate in community freesheets and that they would influence voters. I do not know which way.

    The effect of local issues of that sort can only be assessed within the constituency itself not least because there is a four party system and many combinations of two, and often three, parties in contention.

    The second news source is trade press.

    The point in a long decline when I made up my mind that the time was up for the last Conservative government was when I read a savage and well argued attack on education policy in Double Reed Magazine. This is a quarterly niche publication read by oboe and bassoon teachers, and their pupils. The readership must be in the low hundreds.

    At the same time, a radio arts panel broadcast listened to by almost nobody morphed into a similar no holds barred attack on Conservative policy by composer Sally Beamish. No balance there either.

    I realised then that small interest groups and not just large ones matter if there are enough of them and people are sufficently angry to set aside their normal voting pattern.

    North of the central belt there are many industries and issues which are far more important than the Sun’s support for the Conservatives in its English editions.

    Most of these are devolved issues, or – to take the most important one – North Sea fishing – those most involved think they should be. They are therefore the concern of Richard Lochhead, who hardly rates a mention in The Scotsman, still less a concerted attack like MacAskill or Hyslop. His dozens of minor initiatives are about things that urban populations neither know or care about, from bees, to pig welfare and marketing, sport, farmed and wild fish, mink badgers and raptors.

    I’m not even sure what a raptor is. Still less do I know whether the SNP government is doing the right thing, but they are doing a lot of doing where the urban parties had little interest when they were in government.

    Better then to read The Farmer, than read The Scotsman if you want to know what issues are important in the SNP target seats.

  36. I don’t see what use this is other than to reassure the “chattering classes”… how many plausible British NP voters do you think watch Question Time or take part in polling?!

    I think the “mainstream” is in danger of serious complacency, and of underestimating the British NP’s ability to reach the parts other parties can’t reach – the alienated.

  37. BENM

    “Makes me glad we live in a liberal parliamentary democracy where minorities are defended from such warped, selfish, indulgent, press-driven views.”

    One of the problems of modern politics is that “liberal” and “democracy” are not synonyms. If the popular will in such areas as immigration, the death penalty, membership of the EU and other policies identified with liberalism is ignored by political parties then we are not truly a democracy. If we take democracy to the point at which minority views are overridden and we have government by referendum then we cease to be a liberal society.

    I am unashamedly a liberal, but I recognise that this means we are not as democratic as we would like to believe. This is a weakness because it allows parties like the BNP to pose as the defenders of true democracy with some justice.

    We absolutely must find a way of addressing the concerns of many people that they are losing control over their lives and the nature of their society by an honest debate that rejects misleading charges of racism otherwise we will force them into the arms of the far Right. And the far Left’s cry of “no platform for views with which I disagree” is a serious threat to both liberalism and democracy.

  38. John Dick,

    “I’m not even sure what a raptor is ” – yet living in rural Argyll – surely you jest ? Some raptors (typically birds of prey) have a good press, others (typically possesing four legs) do not. Perhaps this was a tongue-in cheek dig at metropolitan Labour’s stance on fox-hunting – as a result of which we have too many of these pests in our suburban gardens – eating pet bunnies and the like..

    Just as I wonder at the lack of popular understanding of the food chain, I sometimes think our urban liberal “elite” don’t understand the industrial supply chain either – hence their focus on boosting consumption without understanding that if you do not develop your production capability first, you merely suck in imports or create inflation.

    Returning to your basic point, I agree that the SNP has understood the importance of being relevant to rural voters. This is necessary if they wish to retain their existing seats while seeking (greyer) pastures in the urban central belt.

    Labour has never been a rural party, but I fear that the LDs may be forgetting this important anchor, as they plan their advance into Labour’s urban heartlands, hence their increasing weakness in SW England.

  39. Colin,

    “On QT it is beyond me why Griffin didn’t press this point home. It was the one topic on which he would have gained support.

    Why did he not ask the simple question of the other panelists-” How many people is too many-or do you think population density & it’s attendant infrastucture requirements is of no concern?” ”

    Herein lies a paradox which begs the question as to what purpose the BBC really thought they were serving in this edition of QT.

    The programme was almost entirely devoted to questions which the BNP might regard as “their” subjects, yet failed to engage with the underlying issues. Griffin was understandably defensive, but yet he never took the argument to his opponents, showing a lack of debating skills.

    If the BBC were trying to be truly impartial, the programme would have concentrated on “ordinary” issues like health, education or the economy. Had they done so, it would have been evident that not only do the BNP have nothing meaningful to say on most such issues, their party leader (and by – albeit a little stretched – extension, their candidate for PM) is incapable of engaging in proper political discourse.

    Treating the BNP as “just another politcial party” would actually have been more effective in rendering them irrlevant than the onslaught which allowed Griffin to proclaim himself a “victim” of the liberal media.

    In that context, I have to agree with Seal Pup that this was more about reassuring the chattering classes in their complacency than really tackling the issues which have enabled the BNP to build up its current levels of support.

  40. A John B Dick

    “I’m not even sure what a raptor is”

    Then you will not miss them when your crazy on-shore windfarm programme decimates the two large species that your country is home to.

    ……………how on earth can any one who calls the Scottish Highlands home not be aware of the Golden Eagle?

  41. Paul-yes I agree.

    I was very much in favour of giving Griffin a platform -but expected him to be well briefed & to produce considerable embarrassment for the other panelists with simple questions on immigration-which the main parties have flunked.

    In the event the “loaded” audience & partial Chairmanship ( both disgraceful) gave Griffin a degree of sympathy vote & the feeling that he had been ambushed.

    Nevertheless , for me, that he was unable to discuss the very important issue of the uncontrolled immigration of the last few years, except in terms of colour & race, indicated that his focus is very narrow.

    ie-the WWC areas where availability of jobs & housing can be linked to high immigrant populations & immigration flows are his target. He has no pretentions to a national political platform & as you say, this would have been exposed completely if QT had not held that kangaroo court.

  42. @Leslie Moss

    I think your post does highlight the semantic problems with politics.
    These words: democracy; liberal; racism, are all quite ill-defined and can conjure up quite different images in different people’s minds.

    My understanding is that Liberalism is meant to be a description of ideology in terms of economics; as opposed to Libertarianism which is an ideological descriptor of the opposite of Totalitarianism; Democracy is merely a vehicle for delivering a mandate – China operates “democracy” at local levels; but certainly not Liberalism or Libertarianism.
    My understanding is of a cubic spectrum of personal liberty; political liberty; and economic liberty, where various ideologies, parties, and personalities can be adequately located and described.
    Frequently the Brit NP is described as “far right”, which doesn’t really adequately or accurately describe their left-of-Labour economic perspective… and gets them muddled up with UKIP and the Tories… this kind of muddled way of depicting them is to me a sign that they are, as a phenomena, not properly understood by their opponents in the establishment.
    “Liberalism” is not meant to be about social issues: that’s Libertarianism. The Brit Nats, are not a “far right” party (as right is supposed to describe laissez-faire economics), they are a centre-left palaeo-conservative ethnocentrist group – but no-one wants to hear that, because it doesn’t trip off the tongue as well as shorter epithets do.

    The QT “event” was a foolish debacle on the part of the establishment. Because what they did is dispelled any pretence of their impartiality towards the Brit NP, polarising the situation into a “them and us” struggle; in doing so, they have also effectively (i.e. in deeds rather than words) made a statement to the effect of confirming that the BBC/public sector and the main parties represent a united establishment. The reason why this is unwise, is that it is these uptilnow unlinked institutions that have been progressively alienating much of the public; hence what we have now is an emergent new ideological conflict, where there was none.

    Recent news along the lines of: immigrant reproduction rates will push the population to 70m in a decade or so; and Mr Neather’s recent leak that Labour consciously hid a policy of deliberate ethnic demographic engineering over the last 10 years are serving only to play into the hands of one side in this; and incidents such as the QT event in context look more like impatient outbursts of exasperation from the establishment at it’s failure to keep the Brit NP out of official politics.

    Frankly, I think the whole Brit Nat thing is a red herring… they are simply being used to draw fire from the main parties so that they can depict themselves as morally upright, after the expenses scandal has put that into question. I think the Brit Nats also serve another useful function for the main parties: of enabling them to pursue watered-down versions of their policies, all wrapped up in fluffy PC language.
    For the media – well, 8.3 million viewers never came so easy did they!
    The Brit Nats are not the story here… don’t take the bait.

  43. “Nicholas’s post above is exactly the same BNP garbage as is being posted across the English/UK blogosphere, though I haven’t seen it on a single Scottish site so far.”

    Frank Field, a Labour MP, said pretty much the same thing as I did. Is he spouting “BNP garbage” as well? I guess you find it bizarre why a native people do not want to see their country populated by foreigners. To me it’s blindingly obvious. This is what Enoch Powell said : “…we have an identity of our own, as we have a territory of our own … the instinct to preserve that identity, as to defend that territory, is one of the deepest and strongest implanted in mankind”.

    (By the way, I’ve never voted BNP, nor would I.)

  44. “Nicholas’s post above is exactly the same BNP garbage as is being posted across the English/UK blogosphere, though I haven’t seen it on a single Scottish site so far.”

    Aye, but that’s ‘cos we’re yet to rid ursels o’ the sassenachs! Once they’re gone, who else will there be to blame for all the smackheads, neds, and doleys?

  45. A week after the Question Time broadcast, I am wondering whether this storm in a teacup, about a party whom events have shown few people support broadcast or no broadcast, actually suited the Government and other established parties (and “the establishment”). It created a great deal of political debate in a week ly little of import has actually happened or indeed been discussed.

    I guess the Government is treading water because it no longer has time to get legislation through before the election, and voters are treading water because they have made their minds up. And of course many MPs are demoralised and distracted by expenses problems.

    This is very worrying to many people, as reflected in the opinon polls, because there are desperate needs to address economic problems – but none of the three major parties are offering anything remotely sufficient – and plenty of other issues such as the environment. But we’ve been very worried for a year now.

    I suspect there are plenty of people who realise that the BNP are not the answer but who would look in desperation to a more plausible new option, as is hinted at by stated intentions such as low propensity to vote and weak loyalty to the party currently preferred.

  46. I’ve been out of the frame for the last fortnight.

    Hhas there been any polling that postdates last Friday’s announcement of GDP for Q2? The 0.4% fall was unexpected and led to falls in the pound and the stock market. Together with today’s announcement of a rise in the US economy over the same period, this news cannot be helpful to Labour’s image.

1 2