In which Bradford's Labour councillors vote against free speech...

****

The strange party that is Respect put a motion to Bradford Council calling for the English Defence League (EDL) to be banned. For sure they used a posh word - 'proscribed' - but what they wanted was them banned because they hold some unpleasant and rather racist views. Apparently this makes them terrorists (I understand that Respect are loony lefties and probably believe in collective guilt but this was an argument I just didn't get) so we can ban them under our rather egregious terrorism laws.

The Conservative Group considered this and decided that we would respond with a simple statement of principle:

"Council affirms its support for free speech"

We took the view that this would remind people of how democracy is important and that free speech is central to democracy. Put simply, without free speech democracy is a sham. We also pointed out that banning things - OK, 'proscribing' - is a great way to get publicity (Cllr Glen Miller our group leader managed to get 'Life of Brian', Robin Thicke and 'Spycatcher' into his speech).

Affirming our support for free speech would allow the police and others to manage (or overmanage as sometimes happens) the risks of disorder and to deal with crimes such as inciting violence. The last thing we needed was a headline saying 'Council calls for EDL to be banned'.

However, we lost the vote - Bradford's Labour Councillors chose to oppose free speech so their own mealy-mouthed piece of fence sitting got passed!

I had to smile! I always knew socialists didn't believe in free speech. And now I have it confirmed!

....

The EDL in Bradford: a suggestion...

****

Next weekend those lovely people, the EDL are popping in to visit Bradford. Not for a spot of shopping and certainly not for a curry but for that most un-English of pastimes - marching down the street waving banners.

Not surprisingly the Council and the cops are in a bit of a funk over this - last time this charming bunch of neo-Nazis visited the city, we rolled out 1,700 policemen to welcome them (not sure how many came but is was fewer than 100).

It is a self-evident fact that laying on massed hordes of policemen and making their visit the top of every agenda and every news broadcast delivers precisely what the EDL want - publicity. Plus of course that other bunch of nutters - the anti-democratic left - will turn up. Sadly George Galloway and the EDL deserve eachother - they are cast from the same unpleasant mould.

I do however rather agree with Dave Green (this is not a common occurrence) when he says:

...stay away from a protest by the far-right English Defence League (EDL) and any counter-demonstration in the city later this month.

I would go further and say to those who are tempted to go and shout (or worse) at the EDL as they shamble past dragging their knuckles on the flags - don't bother. Do something more practicable - take the kids to the park, go for a walk along the canal, watch football on the telly, pop into your local pub, have a McDonald's,  sing folk songs in the garden, climb a tree, play board games, wash the car, fix that dripping tap you've been meaning to fix... Anything but go into Bradford and indulge the EDL's power fantasies, anything but pretend there is any value of purpose in having a "peaceful multicultural celebration" right in front of this bunch of mindless thugs. That is just plain stupid, is bad for Bradford and simply reinforces the views contained in the EDL's brain cell.

Ignore the EDL march. Don't grace them with the attention they crave. Don't provide them with justification for holding another march. Don't pretend you can face them down. Don't take it on yourself to "confront" their evil message. Just ignore them, treat them with the disdain they deserve. Do something else.

....

Public engagement - West Yorkshire Police Authority style

****

The great and good of West Yorkshire Police Authority are planning to descend on Keighley where they will present to us (or rather the dozen or so who know about the occasion and can be bothered to attend) stories of the wonders done by the Authority and the Police Force it doesn't really run:

Kiran Bali, vice-chairman of the committee, said: “This is our third visit to the Bradford district since we started taking this committee out into communities within West Yorkshire over a year ago, but our first visit to Keighley."

No idea who Kiran Bali might be - except that he's certainly not from Keighley and seems inordinately smug about three trips to the "Bradford District" (population 500,000). Apparently the occasion will feature a discussion on "public confidence in the police".

Unfortunately either the newspaper or the police authority have neglected to tell the reader when or where the consultation event is to take place. So those readers will just move on and live with the fact that they have a police force noticeable mostly by its absence. A police force that can find 1500 officer to police a handful of EDL demonstrators - and then spend endless hours bragging about how well it handled that problem - but can't find a copper to man a front desk overnight to deal with the desperate victim, the frightened old lady or the offender who hands himself in.

It really is a bit of a joke really.

....

Who is Bradford?

I had pondered writing a grand, selfish post about yesterday’s ‘events’ in Bradford. I might have pondered the essential illogicality of attempting to ban a march on grounds of ‘diversity’ or the rather pathetic attempts by Unite Against Fascism to claim that their “we are Bradford” event wasn’t a counter demonstration. It may walk like a duck, quack like a duck and taste good with orange sauce but apparently it’s a ‘peaceful, multicultural celebration’.

However, I thought instead that I’d ask the question ‘who is Bradford?’ After all the UAF and fellow travellers have laid claim to being Bradford and I’m not really so sure that they are – in any meaningful sense – ‘Bradford’. Indeed, away from the City Centre (albeit just a hop, skip and a jump away) a separate ‘peace’ event was help on Infirmary Fields in Manningham.

So who is Bradford? Is it the collection of people – artists, performers, local politicians and assorted (mostly middle-class public sector) people who laid claim to the title? Or is it people across the city who just did what they always do on a Saturday – go to the supermarket, watch the television, maybe take the kids to play cricket, rugby or football? I really don’t know but I guess that the sentiment expressed by “we are Bradford” is best understood through the negative juxtaposition with the EDL – what Bradford isn’t is racist.

Yet – setting aside the very public display of bigotry we saw yesterday – anyone with his ears open would recognise the casual racism is very much part of Bradford. Whether it’s the old man I know who regularly refers to black footballers as “coons” or the young Kashmiri cricketers I hear speaking in racist and disparaging terms about Bengalis. Or the good Asian friend who uses the term ‘jewed’ to describe his loss in a property deal. None of these people would have been anywhere near yesterday’s demonstrations but they are very much part of Bradford.

For what it’s worth, I don’t believe those laying claim to ‘being Bradford’ are any more representative of the City than were the brayingly repulsive EDL thugs. And I do not find UAF to be an especially appealing group with its focus on direct action, confrontation and “the streets”. Plus a divisive ‘if you’re not with us you’re against us’ attitude to those of us who refuse to get involved with organisations run by an extremist, ultra-left, anti-democratic political movement.

So who is Bradford then – assuming we really want an answer to what is a pretty daft question? It’s all of these people – black, white, old young, male female, gay, straight, fascists, the loony left and the grumpy old man party. And some of Bradford is racist – not in a ‘beat you up’ kind of way but in a pre-judging, misunderstanding and ignorant way. We cannot wish away this fact through willy-wagging celebrations of ‘multiculturalism’ – especially when so many of the City’s residents live comfortably within their monocultural bubble. And these people don’t wish to be shoe-horned into some form of faux cultural sharing.

Racism is stupid. But its existence isn’t removed by punishment nor can we just wish it away in some form of middle class multicultural group hug. Nor should it be used as a vehicle for promoting extremist politics – whether of the nasty right or the unpleasant left. The solution – if there is one – lies in shared experience not in laws, punishments and the seeking out of new sins.

....

You don't think Councillors have any say on these matters, do you? We're lucky to be 'consulted'!

****

Now dearly beloved reader, I’m going to explain how our system of local government works and, specifically the role of the councillor (or rather ‘elected member’ as we are more commonly called these days).

I know that you believe Councillor’s to be all powerful, semi-divine, genii bestriding and directing the colossus of local government (or maybe a bunch of self-serving, money-grubbing second-rate has-beens). But understand this. Most – 99% of the decisions on policy taken by local councils are not taken following debate at a committee. Councillors – well, most of us – simply aren’t involved at all in the decisions taken by the councils to which we are elected.

In the comments to this campaigning post from Anna Raccoon about Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council’s decision to fine a woman for flicking cigarette ash is this desire:

That ‘revised Enforcement Policy’ does make for some terrifying reading. I would love to have been in that council committee and listened and watched the type of people that came up with that vile and sinister piece.

One hates to disappoint but, my guess (I did try to find the actual minute but – and this is indicative of the problem – finding minutes and agendas of committee meetings on SMBC’s website isn’t easy) is that the offending policy was agreed by “cabinet” which means no public discussion and debate as that august body has only Labour members selected by the leader. This is confirmed by the revised ‘Governance Arrangements’ (another document most councilors won’t have read).

The truth is that decisions in local government aren’t taken in the manner most ordinary people – including quite well-informed ordinary people – believe is the case. Us councilors no longer sit on various committees in numbers reflecting the political balance of the council. Eight or ten councilors make up a (usually) one-party executive – often pompously called the ‘cabinet’ – and it is here that the decisions are taken. But understand that any discussion takes places away from the scrying eyes of the public – in Bradford we had a thing called “CMT” consisting of Executive Members and the Council’s “Strategic Directors” where the real decisions were made. You must also understand that most of the decisions are made under “delegated authority” by one or other ‘strategic director’.

Which brings me to a second example, the proposed banning of a march through Bradford by the English Defence League (EDL) and, one assumes, any counter-march by the equally unpleasant ‘Unite Against Fascism’ (UAF). Although the permission to grant a ban came from the Home Office, this was on application from Bradford Council’s Chief Executive. You will, of course, not that no politicians are quoted in the BBC report. The only comment I can find is a mealy-mouthed, weasel-worded one from Ian Greenwood, Council Leader:

We are grateful to the Home Secretary for considering this. It is not an easy decision.

The decision relating to this ban – a significant decision to limit fundamental freedoms – has not been taken following political debate. The majority of councillors haven’t been asked for their view and certainly haven’t had any chance to vote. The matter hasn’t been before a committee – even a one-party ‘cabinet’.

Understand that this is the norm for decisions in local government – you elect councillors believing they might have some say over these kind of momentous decisions and that they will be involved in discussing and debates major policies like the enforcement policy in Sandwell. Sorry to disappoint, we’ve not and haven’t been since the last Labour government “modernised” local government.

....