BNP MEMBERSHIP LIST LEAKED! - 10000 IS THAT IT?

Shock Horror! The BNP's membership list has been printed on the Internet! Who cares?

The only thing that it as brought home to me is how insignificant this minority party really are.

For all the huff and puff we hear on this blog about how they are the future for our City nay, our Country. this list proves that it is all piss and wind!

Lets put this pathetic number into some sort of perspective shall we:

Tory Party 290000 members
Labour Party 210000 members
Liberal Democrat Party 70000 members
UKIP Party 16000 members
Green Party 12000 members (England, Scotland, Wales N.Ire)
BNP 10000 members.

At the last General Elections the BNP polled at total of 191,519 votes out of a possible 27000000 votes cast!

The BNP won over 100 council seats at the May 2008 elections in the United Kingdom which is in fact, less than 1% of the total number of seats available.

In Stoke on Trent the BNP polled 8086 vote out of 55288 (14.6%).

Given the fact that Labour is supposed to be on it's arse in this city and is most certainly suffering from the ineptness of the policies of the Labour Elected Mayor, Mark Meredith, Labour managed to poll 14038 vote out of the possible 55288 cast (25.3%)

We are constantly told on this blog by certain posters that the BNP in this city, are like the 2ND coming of the Messiah! The first coming of the No9 bus seems more apt to me!

BNP membership is frowned upon in many organisations, the Police, Fire Brigade, Teaching, Further Education, the Clergy, the Armed Forces, and so it goes on. This leaked membership list has people as young as 14 on it, which in my opinion should be against the law!

Nick Griffin admits that some of his members, especially those in the professions listed above are vulnerable. I say if a name appeared on one of the mainstream parties membership list no one would give a toss! Could it be that association with such an extreme, hateful party who's policies are based on the colour of one skin, might be reviled by the vast majority of the British people.

There is no doubting that the BNP have 9 councillors in our city and have prospered because of the EMB.

The EMB have no doubt taken the voices of every single separate political party represented in Stoke on Trent and left just the collective of the EMB and the extreme views of the BNP.

The BNP would have us believe that they are the answers to all our prayers but in truth, given the above statistics we would be better of voting for UKIP or the Green Party if we were looking to place a protest vote.

Over the next few months we will be bringing the other parties to the forum and giving you the cities electorate the chance to make your mind up which party best represents your ideals and I'm sure if we did this the BNP's popularity would diminish.

The BNP would have us believe that they are a united organisation but this membership list was posted by an angry member who wants to start off a leadership contest. This dissenter believes that Nick Griffin is too dictortorial and want rid of him. This latest rift comes not long after Griffin kicked out most of his executive who also wanted rid of the Welsh Wizard! They went on to form their own far right party called the "Voice of Change" (CLICK)
The BNP are about as united as the "Strictly Come Dancing" judges!

The BNP a credible alternative to the mainstream parties? I'd better be off.... the No9 bus is due............ Oh look a flying pig!

BLUE IS THE COLOUR - SHAUN SPEAKS TO PITSNPOTS!

In the second of our exclusive articles aimed at getting the party voice back into our city, we have the words and thoughts of Blurton's very own Conservative Party Activist Shaun Bennett.
Shaun is, like Labour's Tom Reynolds, a young, driven and enthusiastic party member, who knows his parties policies better than most!
I have followed his posts both on the Sentinel and on pitsnpots for a long time now and his reasoned debate has nearly had me turning blue a few times! I would like to thank Shaun for submitting his blog and wish him well for the future. I think the people of Trentham & Hanford could do a lot worse than voting Shaun in at the expense of "you know who!" at the next elections, they would be assured of getting a real Tory!

"I would like to begin by joining Tom Reynolds in his praise of Tony and the team who have set up the site to get local people involved in local political issues and perhaps in time more national debates too. I'm sure we've all thought that the voices of North Staffordshire have been ignored for too long, and I for one am very pleased that an outlet now exists for as many of those voices as possible to be heard. I'm particularly pleased that Tony and the team have gone out of their way to get a range of political persuasions involved without bias - be they Tories like me, Labour, Liberal or BNP.
These are actually quite exciting times for Stoke-on-Trent. The decision we made last Thursday is going to determine how the city is governed for at least another decade, and hopefully far beyond it. As a psephologist - hopefully in touch with the thoughts of people of the city - I never really had any doubt that the YES campaign to abolish the mayor was going to be successful. The demographic and procedural factors alone (such as differential turnout, the wording of the question and the process of casting the vote in a polling station rather than by post) were I think biased towards a YES outcome. The fact that people's natural reaction to an unpopular administration is to support change and my view that the YES campaign totally demolished all the main arguments for the mayoral system,and then a positive result seemed largely secured.
But then with the Sentinel's piece on the BNP being favourite to win the Leadership of the city just a day before polling, I have to admit that I briefly had cause to think again. As it turned out of course, the YES vote won by something of a landslide - albeit on a very low turnout. Whilst I agree with Cllr Reynolds that a low turnout is never desirable, I would gently remind him that Labour imposed a National Assembly upon the people of Wales on a turnout not far greater than we had last Thursday, and by a far, far closer margin. I can't be sure, but I'm convinced that the votes of Stoke South in particular were crucial and I would be interested to see how the votes broke down by constituency and by ward.
So should we decry having lost our right to directly elect the person who leads the council? Well I think not actually. We will GET our chance to decide who leads the council when the time comes to elect our councillors, in exactly the same way as the leadership of almost every other local authority in the country is decided. If we don't like what the leadership is doing we can vote to change it, and unlike under the mayoral system our votes in local elections will now be decisive and will have meaning once more. Perhaps now that the result of local elections will actually matter to the governance of the city, local parties will once more take an interest in winning them, as I'm sure we've all noticed a significant slide in the visibility of the various campaigns over the last 6 years.
My hope is that we can now make savings on the mayor's salary, give power back to councillors - which after all is what they should be elected to do - reintroduce some degree of order and democratic accountability in our political system and perhaps get clearer and - though let's not get too hopeful - better governance as a result. If we can see Mayor Meredith and his colleagues on the dole queue at the same time, well that's all for the better! The city never really wanted to adopt a mayoral system in the first place; certainly those that are most interested in local politics didn't want it. We started off by choosing the wrong type of mayoral system (since abolished by the government) and then not really giving it much of a chance. With a return to a system that we really wanted to adopt in the first place, perhaps things will change for the better - and I hope that we resist getting bogged down in a pointless debate about changing the system back again in the years to come.
I do however have two real concerns about the immediate future: First, I am concerned about this "Transition Board" that seems to have appeared out of nowhere. I don't remember any discussion of a transition board during the referendum campaign? I don't know how this panel of the great and the good have been put onto the board? They certainly haven't been elected. I don't know what powers or authority this board will have or even what the point is of them being there; surely we already know the way forward for the city in terms of the political system? On the other hand, if it is going to be available to 'hold the hands' of our local political leaders and to give them cause to think twice before doing anything stupid, then it can only be a good thing. The fact that it only seems to be in place for the next 6 months or so should probably ease our concerns about its being, since it is after all only temporary.
My second concern is however much more serious. It seems that now that we have voted YES to getting rid of the elected mayor's office, the sitting councillors will now start to discuss who is going to lead the city ahead of a big decision next May. In the short term at least, the people DON'T get any say over who that person is going to be. The democratic principle of the Leader and Cabinet system is that the electorate can still indirectly choose the leadership of the council by voting for councillors - the implication being that the party or group with most support delivered by the electorate as seats on the council will take the leadership. Unfortunately, the councillors who are there at present were elected under the old mayoral system. They were NOT elected to form an administration or to take the leadership of the authority. And yet it is this group of people who will now choose the Leader without any reference to the electorate.
In my view, there should be an all out council election next May or June so that people will be able to vote knowing that they are voting for a party or group to lead the council as well as an individual local councillor to represent them. At present we have expressed our preference for a local representative but not for who we want to lead the council. And if rumours that the next council election will not be held until ward boundaries change in 2011 are true, we could find ourselves in a situation in which whoever is chosen to lead the authority could do so without any test of public opinion for the next two and a half years!
An all out council election would not be extraordinary, given the circumstances. We have them whenever ward boundaries change - and so we will almost certainly be having one in 2011 anyway. In 1996 when the City Council became a Unitary Authority, a full council election was held then even though all that was changing was the extent of the powers of the authority. Are we really expected to accept that there will be no full election at a time when it is not just the powers of the authority that is changing but the entire executive leadership of the city? These councillors were not elected to lead us, they were elected to hold to account the person that led us; how can they get away with assuming power in their own right without an election? We may well find that the councillors who people thought suitable to represent them as a scrutineer will be different to those that they want to represent them now that the choice for a potential government. I can certainly name a couple of wards where a change of councillor will now be wanted by local people - and some of those changes may well affect the names in the frame to become Leader of the authority!
Nationally, the official Conservative position seems to be to support elected mayors. Of course, they would never attempt to enforce that opinion onto local parties that thought differently and that is what happened in the case of the local party in Stoke. Like all the main parties, except for the BNP, we were totally divided between the YES and NO options. Perhaps also like the other main parties - certainly Labour - the division goes much deeper than over the mayoralty alone. Issues of group leadership, support for the cross-party coalition and certain controversial policy decisions have all been tearing the main parties apart for a number of years now. Personally, I believe that the root cause of many of those problems have come from the demands of the political system under the elected mayor.
The YES vote last Thursday gives me great cause for hope and optimism for the future. The quality of our elected representatives may not improve dramatically under any system, and that will be in the hands of the people. To a large extent as voters we are the makers of our own fortunes,and we cannot really complain when we continue to elect the same people that we constantly condemn as being poor. In the short term we may well see a great era of instability as the smaller parties benefit from the 'cross party coalition' of Mayor Meredith. But in the long term I now can see the beginnings of reunification for both the Conservative and Labour parties. The City may never again return to the two party politics or even one and a half party politics that we have enjoyed for the past 30 years. In many ways that may even be a good thing, but I can at least see the Conservative and Labour parties starting to become competitive again if they really want to be and if they are prepared to cut off the dead wood and get back in touch with real voters. Only time will tell how this story unfolds..."

Shaun Bennett BA (Hons), MA Former Deputy Chairman, Stoke-on-Trent Conservatives.

BRING THE U.S. TO US!

Have you, like me, been following the Presidential Campaign in the USA? Wow! They know how to drag something out don't they?

It has been fun to watch though, and seeing the candidates Obama & McCain, turning out in all corners of the country to bid for those last few votes made me realise just how important it is for politicians of what ever level, to connect with the electorate.

I know that last week, it was a fairly intense news week. Feeling was running high throughout the city in the run up to the governance referendum, and for what? A below 20% turn out!

I found myself pondering why the turn out was so bad, do the people of our city care about what happens? Are the population so pissed off at the state of local politics? I came to the conclusion that councillors and MP's alike need to engage with the population of our city!

Over the next seven months, our politicians have a chance of a new beginning, a clean slate. There is too much complacency, councillors say all to often " this is the way it's always been done", well that just won't do anymore!

The debate in this city of who will be leader and what party stands for what has got to be re-ignited. The people of Stoke on Trent need to be won over and our interest in the local political issues awakened.

What I would like to see is for us to take a leaf out of America's book. I want to see the candidates for the Leadership contest go head to head in a number of public debates at somewhere like the Kings Hall (pictured top right) in Stoke with a packed audience and the whole thing broadcast to the entire city.

We have been small time for too long now, time to think big! It's is time for our politicians to be made to face their electorate and to answer the questions put to them from us, the public.

We don't want the Council's highly paid press officer fencing the more demanding and sensitive questions. We don't want it all to be kept "low key" and to be sorted behind close doors.

We want straight answers, straight talking and above all, we want the best man/woman winning.

By the time next May come around we want each party to state who is going to be their preferred Leadership Candidate and it should be this person that faces the public and fights to win the day for their parties! We want to know what each and every party stands for and what their manifesto is, so that we can make are minds up who will do the best job of leading our city.

They should know that if they do not deliver on their promises, both leader and party will be made to pay at the first chance at the ballot box, nowhere to run and no where to hide!

I would love the chance of chairing these debates. I would make sure every question was answered by all the leadership candidates. Imagine a packed Kings Hall and on stage the Labour, Conservative, Libdem, BNP and Independents leadership candidates all trying to win the day for their party and for themselves.

This would surely bring the party voice back into Stoke after so long of just hearing the same old, same old from the Elected Mayor and his Portfolio Holders.

We deserve more don't we? We deserve a choice of what party and we deserve to know which leader we will get from that chosen party, don't we?

So I throw the gauntlet down to the parties in our City:

Labour - Will it be Mike, Mark or Joy and what will you do for this City? Are your group united? Will you do better than when you had the majority last time? Will you look again at the decisions that made the Labour Elected Mayor so unpopular?

Conservative - Will it be Roger or Ross, and what will you do for the people you have so badly let down in Trentham and what Tory policies can we hear about?

Libdem - Will it be Jean or Keiran and how will you make your party electable in a city that has seen so few Libdem candidates in the past, will you tell us just what do you stand for?

BNP - Will it be Alby, Mike or Steve and is your party racist? What will you do for the sizable number of British people born here but who's skin colour isn't white?

What do we have to fear from you?

Independent - Will it be Alan, Brian or Terry and just what the hell do you lot stand for? What are your policies? Why do you court all the other parties in this city? Have you got a party manifesto?

I feel so passionate about getting this PUBLIC debate on and I want your help! I promise you I would make Jeremy Paxman seem like Bambi! I want to know what questions you want answers to! I want to know who you want as each parties Leader Candidate or who you don't want! I want to know if you would attend a U.S. type of debate at the Kings Hall?

If we applied the pressure on to our local politicians they would not be able to get out of such an event! Can we make this happen?

IT'S ALL THEATRE - ISN'T IT?

William Hague (Tory) deputised for David Cameron, Harriet Harman (Labour) for Gordon Brown and Vince Cable (Libdem) for Nick Clegg at Prime Ministers Questions in the House of Commons today. I must admit to loving the theatre of PMQ's. There is no doubt in my mind that William Hague scored a massive victory for his party over the dispatch box today. He played the role like a lead actor and to be frank Harriet Harman could not live with the guy!
Mr Hague criticised Labour's economic record since 1997."The claim to have abolished boom and bust was one of the most foolish, hubristic and irresponsible claims by a British prime minister," Mr Hague said.
Harman the Labour Deputy Leader countered with the comment that the economy was "made of stern stuff" and should not be "talked down" she went on to say "He should not write Britain off or compare us unfavourably with other countries,"
Wlliam Hagues performance will give encouragement to the party faithful after some tories accused David Cameron of being weak and indecisive in his comments about government intervention in the financial crisis.
Gordon Brown PM delighted his party members with his strong leadership and his efforts to get other countries on board to help their ailing banks.
Vince Cable concentrated his attack on Harriet Harmon by saying that he felt that the Labour Deputy "does not realise there is a real emergency" with the economy" All in all it was a rocky performance by Harmon while Hague performed like Rocky! Still as I say it's all theatre isn't it? What do you think about PMQ's and the whole commons traditions? Who is the best commons performer you have ever seen?

THE TRUTH ,THE LIGHT AND THE DEBATE!

We here at pitnspots want the political parties to get involved in our blog. We want all the parties to put up a candidate to become a regular contributor to our site and write an article to be posted on the blog. This would be the ideal opportunity to shout about their parties achievements, what they have done for the good of our city, what they are planning to do in the future. It would also be a great vehicle to get their party policies over to the people who take an interest in local politics. It would also provide a platform for each party to have their say about an opposition parties policies and performance.
It's what i think politics in this city needs. There is a distinct lack of information to help the electorate make up their minds on which party is most representative of their views.
Sometimes the silence from our elected representatives is deafening! For instance I have no idea what the Libdems vision is for our city or their preferred system of governance, the same could be said of the Tories and if I'm honest here the one thing the coalition has done for this city is to dilute the traditional party debate!
Whilst the current cabinet system might be the holy grail for Mark Meredith it just deprives the cities electorate of the party voice.
I want the Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, BNP and/or City Independent Parties to put forward a candidate to write on behalf of their branch/party. If I've missed anyone out let me know. What do our posters and followers think of this idea? Is the absence of individual parties voices the reason that the far right BNP have become more popular. What is your understanding of each of the parties policies? Which is the most effective party locally? Who do you think each parties contributors should be?.......................... Over to you!

Should They Stay or Should They Go?

This is one that will cause a great deal of keen debate for sure!Fred Nukagem and Sandra Yonga Mbell have three e young kids, he came to this country on a student visa and she is here illegally. I'm really torn in two about this because if they are deported and they are killed doesn't that leave us with blood on our hands? On the other hand i have been saying on the Sentinel website that i think the BNP have got more successful because the mainstream parties are not tough enough on immigration. What do the BNP supporters want to happen here.... i think i can guess! A few months ago there was a case of a gay Iranian man who was fighting deportation because when he left Iran his lover was executed for being gay. Where do we draw the line? I do think that there has to be clear legislation on immigration and have always believed that this has to come from either Labour, Conservatives or LibDems, but i get the impression that they are worried of losing the non white vote. Read the full story at the Sentinel just click this link: http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/DEPORT-LL-KILLED/article-352438-detail/article.html

Hi All,
Well i have been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century! I would never have thought a few years ago that i would be hosting my very own blog!
Q What are we about?
A We are about giving the great people of Stoke on Trent a Voice!

Q Why?
A 'Cos i reckon that we are all of the opinion that we the ordinary people are not listened to and our opinions count for bugger all!

Q Who can post?
A Anyone! All welcome here. White, Black, British, Asian, European, Labour, Tory, Liberal, BNP, Independant, Gay or Straight Stoke City, Port Vale, Crewe Alex!

Q What will we talk about?
A The issues that face this great city of ours and it's people.

Q Can i ay what i want?
A Yes! but let's try to show some respect to each other, we may disagree but let's not resort to insulting each other. No post will be removed unless they are way over the top. We want to say what needs saying! Comment on here with freedom.... this is not the "sentinel"

Q What happens now?
A Well me "Tony" will upload a blog everyday, maybe more discussing the issues making the news that effect us here in Stoke and then it's over to you!.....