So where do these policies come from? I'm told the model is based on that of (shock, horror) the Labour Party. That is, someone at a branch will suggest a policy, the branch will vote on it and if it approves it, the policy goes through a number of similar stages until it reaches conference level. There, it is spoken to - that is, presented to conference - amendments are made or rejected, it's voted on and, if approved, it becomes party policy.
The BNP varies that slightly, in that only voting members (the BNP elite) can attend the conference and the Advisory Council will chop the number of proposals down from two per region to a single proposal to go on to the conference.
Fair enough. But what are the policies that are presented to the BNP conference? We're never told because, unlike the Labour/Conservative/Lib-Dem and Green conferences, the BNP's is a closed event. And why would that be? Because they talk a load of shite, frankly.
Take a look at the conference proposals from the London region of the party. The first is to demand a fixed-term Parliament. Okay, I agree with that and I'm sure a lot of other people will, too. The third regards nuclear fusion but gets off to a bad start by stating 'I believe that global warming is real...' Well, Nick Griffin doesn't, so that one will almost certainly fall flat on its arse. The second of these proposals is a classic though:
'Teenage mothers - the problem and the solution
Any amount of sexual health education is not going to reduce Britain’s high teen pregnancy rates, whilst the ‘rewards’ for becoming an unmarried teen mother remain so [relatively] attractive. The cycle of girls getting pregnant by man A, then being allocated a council flat & welfare benefits, then getting pregnant by man B, and being allocated a bigger council flat & more benefits, then getting pregnant by man C, and being allocated a council house & yet more benefits has got to STOP. It leads to all sorts of social problems, resulting from mothers who are not mature enough to parent effectively, and end up raising dysfunctional families in poverty. It also costs tax payers a lot of money, to fund these ‘alternative’ lifestyles.
Furthermore, people who have been on housing waiting lists for several years, and who conduct themselves in a responsible manner, find themselves being ‘queue-jumped’ by these feckless members of society.
So, I suggest that there be no council flats and no welfare benefits available to unmarried mothers under the age of 21. Instead they will be placed in ‘mother & baby homes’. Here they will receive academic education as well as parenting classes, plus courses covering all aspects of their social development. The homes will be run by ‘matron’ type figures. The homes should not be ‘institution’ like, but at the same time there will be rules which must be adhered to; such as a curfew of approx 9pm, a dress code which states skirts must come to at least the knees & no cleavage to be on show. Failure to comply with the homes’ rules will result in the mother being sent to prison, and the baby being taken in to care.
This is not a short-term remedy, but a long-term solution. Eventually I believe the implementation of this policy will result in a vast decrease in teenage girls becoming pregnant – as the consequences will be positively unattractive. Of course, teenage pregnancies will never be completely eradicated, and the homes will allow for the girls who do still become teen mothers to learn how to be good parents, whilst not being fast-tracked to the top of the housing queue.
If an 18-20 year old pregnant woman is married [marriage should not be an option available to 16/17 year olds, even with parental consent] and her husband has a job, then she will be exempt from going in to one of the homes.'
The rest of the article is here
http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/08/curfews-knee-length-skirts-and-no.html
Comments
Display the following comment