The news that Nigel Farage survived a plane crash earlier today prompted a sick thought.  (I should immediately say that I am hugely relieved that Nigel Farage survived and that his pilot may not have been as badly injured as at first feared – I may not like Farage’s politics but he is certainly a lively adornment to political discourse.)

The sick thought was that had he been killed the election in the Buckingham constituency would have been void and would have had to be re-run.  This would have meant that John Bercow would definitely not have been returned to Parliament in time for the first session of the House of Commons on 18th May when the first business will be the election of the Speaker.

I have no idea if the procedural textbooks would have provided a solution allowing Speaker Bercow to be reelected in absentia.  However, I am sure those many Conservative MPs who seem to have an abiding hatred of Speaker Bercow would have not been able to resist the temptation to elect an alternative.

Now they’ll have to wait and see who it is that the electors of Buckingham return tonight.

The news that a nineteen year old member of the Aryan Strike Force has been convicted of Terrorism Act offenders is a useful reminder that the counter terrorist work of the Police is not just about al Qaeda inspired terrorism, but encompasses pursuing the activities of the far-right and other violent extremist groupings.

Nicky Davison, 19, was convicted of three separate charges of possessing records useful in committing or preparing acts of terrorism.  Along with his father, he was part of a group called the Aryan Strike Force, which plotted to overthrow the government.  His father, Ian Davison, has already admitted preparing for acts of terrorism and producing a chemical weapon, the deadly poison ricin, one of the world’s most dangerous substances.

Apparently, their plan was to fight against “the Zionist Occupied Government” in the belief that the state had been taken over by Jews.

Over thirty years ago Blair Peach died following a demonstration at an anti-National Front demonstration in Southall, during the 1979 General Election campaign.  Today the Metropolitan Police published the report of the investigation into his death.  The publication of the report follows a long campaign by Blair Peach’s family and Inquest, which was supported unanimously by the Metropolitan Police Authority last year.

The decision by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner to publish the report and its supporting information should have been a very positive display of openness and transparency by the MPS and a demonstration of how much has changed in policing in the last thirty years.

The report itself contains some devastating findings and demonstrates the mindset of the investigation at the time.  For example, the demonstration in which Blair Peach was involved is described as

” an extremely violent, volatile and a ugly situation where there was serious disturbance by what can be classed as a ‘rebellious crowd’.
The legal definition ‘unlawful assembly’ is justified and the
events should be viewed with that kind of atmosphere
prevailing. Without condoning the death I refer to Archibold,
38th Edition, paragraph 2528 “In case of riot or rebellious
assembly the officers endeavouring to disperse the riot are
justified in killing them at common law if the riot cannot
otherwise be suppressed”.”

The investigation report found that: 

“Whilst it can reasonably be concluded that a police officer struck the fatal blow, and that that officer came from carrier U.11, I am sure that it will be agreed that the present situation is far from satisfactory and disturbing.”

It went on:

“The attitude and untruthfulness of some of the officers involved is a contributory factor.

“It is understandable that because of the events of the day officers were confused, or made mistakes, but one would expect better recall of events by trained police officers.

“However, there are cases where the evidence shows that certain officers have clearly not told the truth.”

Sir Paul Stephenson, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, however, in his statement today only felt able to say:

“As a police officer with over thirty four years service reading and being briefed on the investigation reports leaves me feeling deeply uncomfortable. Thirty one years later we have still been unable to provide the family and friends of Blair Peach with definitive answers regarding the terrible circumstances of his death. That is a matter of deep regret.”

This falls a long way short of acknowledging the responsibility of the Metropolitan Police Service for what happened.

Clearly, “sorry” remains a very difficult word for a Commissioner to utter.

A pity.

It looks as though a key element of the Conservative Party’s election strategy is going to be the deniable dog-whistle.

The Observer has revealed today that in a seemingly concerted initiative leaflets have been circulated by the Conservative Party in Andrew Rosindell’s constituency of Romford saying that immigration has caused a population control and that EU treaty obligations on free movement of labour would somehow be over-ridden by a Tory Government.

At the same time, Loanna Morrison, the Conservative prospective parliamentary candidate for Bermondsey and Old Southwark has endorsed the BNP writing on Conservativehome:  “Britain is full, declares Nick Griffin at every opportunity, and he is right.”

Officially, of course, the Tory Party denies that either reflects official Party policy and can distance the Party from such free-lance comments by “junior” politicians.  In reality, the comments come from an official candidate selected to be a Conservative MP and the other comes with the imprint of a sitting Conservative MP.

I expect we will get more of this.

The House of Lords today agreed to refer back a recommendation that would have given force to the House of Commons purported decision to stop UK MEPs from having passes admitting them to the Parliamentary Estate.  The House of Commons decision was intended to avoid having to allow the BNP MEPs, Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons, access but would have had to apply to all MEPs.

In practice, this is not just a matter for the House of Commons.  The Parliamentary Estate is a single entity and there is currently no way in which a passholder can be prevented from entering both ends of the building; it follows therefore that as currently constituted both Houses have to agree to deny passes to particular categories of person.

The original decision to give MEPs passes was intended to facilitate communication between UK MEPs and the UK Parliament and, when the issue was brought to the Lords today, the unanimous view expressed was that this interchange was valuable and important.

There are some 12,000 passholders with access to the Parliamentary Estate – the occasional access by MEPs has not produced any visible problems.

Summing up Lord Brabazon of Tara said:

“The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, I think I can honestly say that I have heard enough. [Laughter] Seldom have I heard such unanimous opposition by noble Lords on all sides and of all political complexions to a House Committee report. I can say that the committee should indeed reconsider this matter, taking into account what has been said today, and we will therefore do just that. Perhaps I may say that the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Tomlinson, is absolutely correct to refer this matter back to the House Committee, so I recommend that the House should agree with his amendment.

Noble Lords: Hear, hear.”

What was left unsaid was: why give Nick Griffin and his sidekick another opportunity to claim martyrdom?

The Quilliam Foundation has published an important new pamphlet, “In Defence of British Muslims: A response to BNP racist propaganda” by Lucy James.  This confronts the myths about British Muslims peddled by the BNP and starts the process by which the pernicious lies and myths that the BNP and others promote can be answered and debunked.

It should be essential reading for all political activists, for anyone who fancies themselves as “a thought leader”, and certainly for journalists and broadcasters.

It highlights the way in which the BNP conflates all Muslims with those small minority promoting an Islamist philosophy.  It draws the distinction between most adherents of Islam and those in the narrowly Conservative revisionist grouping that follow Wahhabism.

It demonstrates why rhetoric about the “Islamification” of Europe is a nonsense and comprehensively rebuts the lie that most British Muslims support terrorism.  It addresses the issues around Islam and the status of women, the attitude to non-Muslims, Sharia Law and the role of science.

Read it!