This is the transcript by V. S. of Jonathan Bowden’s British National Party stump speech in Wigan and Leigh in 2010. The speech can be viewed on YouTube here . If you have corrections, or if you know the exact date and location of the speech, please post them as comments below.
I’d like to thank the organizers in both Leigh and Wigan for inviting me up here. I must have spoken here four months ago. Something like that.
Here in the north I’d like to talk in the last fag-end weeks of New Labour as the Labour machine that came in in ’97 dies in 2010. I’d like to talk about Old-New Labour and their death throes.
I was a grammar school boy in 1979 when Callaghan led them to defeat in ’79, and people didn’t really know what Thatcher was about. Labour was tired, and it was dragging itself to the polls. I think they wanted to nationalize the sunk ports, they had no policies at all, and they flopped down. What we’re seeing now is the New Labour project that began in a wave of hurrah and glory in ’97, with people believing that Blair and Brown were the new hope.
It took several elections, indeed for most people it took three elections, until they realized that Blair was an actor and a Left-wing Tory in certain respects and a frontman and a man who changed his opinion every other day and was equally sincere with you as he did so, and a man who’s a sort of paid barrister who turns one way and says, “I’m with you” and another way and says, “I’m with you” and led us to war on the basis of lies and has led us to bankruptcy as a nation and as a society. Brown was sat next to him in every sofa cabinet that went on from ’97, signing off on all the checks, and it took a long time for our people to see through Blair and to see through Brown.
At the moment they don’t know who to go for, because they don’t like Cameron. He may well win. If he does he’ll only win by default and by a smaller margin than Thatcher achieved in the late 1970s. People will vote for him to get rid of Brown, because “do you want five more years of Brown?” Can you imagine what five more years of Brown would be like? It really would be like living in Broadmoor, wouldn’t it? Or up here in Ashworth, you know?
Every time you look at Gordon he looks older. One eye’s up here, the other’s down here, one of the lips is dropping, the chins get longer and more like a turkey. He looked 55 when he started and he looks 77 now, doesn’t he? And yet he said on Woman’s Hour that he wants to go on and on and on and that there’s no end to the bloke and no end to his government. It’s grinding, statistically obsessed, and financially ruinous government.
Our national debt is about £800 billion. The deficit is about £179 billion. These numbers dwarf most people, and they just turn away when they hear them. What it means is that if every debt in relation to every amount was called in at one time in one go, they couldn’t be covered and in reality what that would mean is an end to all state pensions and an end to all state benefit payments of every sort, an end to all injury and compensation claimants in relation to people who worked in the mines and factories around here. It would involve an end to military service payments for those who fought in the Falklands, who fought in Iraq, whatever one thinks of that conflict, who fought in Afghanistan since and now and so on. It would involve the fact that we had become a Third World country. The only reason those loans and those debts aren’t called in to bring about that explosion is the spending of large amounts of money to stabilize an economy and an economic system underneath which has been beaten and crushed and broken.
Now, there’s a degree to which some people are cynical and are so cynical that they regard New Labour as a sort of tragedy which occurred to the society which in some respects the society asked for.
It’s true that many of our people have adopted a tribal attitude towards voting. In the part of the country that I come from people vote Tory almost without thinking. It’s an unthinking blue wave vote, the way it’s an unthinking red wave vote up here. Until people break out of these blocs our people will return one government of one color and one government of another.
People like to think that the Tories and Labour are at each other’s throats. They like to think that they have different ideologies. They like to believe that their personalities are different, that Brown’s a middle class Scottish arriviste and Cameron’s an upper class Englishman, that the one stands for people with money and the one stands for the working class and trade union power, that they represent different values.
But have a look at what these parties actually stand for. Both parties are now in favor of global capitalism and the movement of large amounts of money around the world. Both are in favor of the casino version of it, which plagued our banks in the city of London — a quarter of our economy is controlled by the financial services sector — and which has plunged us into this cascade of debt that now threatens to engulf and drown us. Both parties believe that world labor moves around the world the way capital does, and labor is migration, and that’s the new word for immigration. The reason that both parties believe in mass migration is to fill holes in the world economy, to keep wages down, to keep a vast subsection of the population either out of work or semi-employed or part-time employed or on the minimum wage or just above it and just around it. Everyone is replaceable. The churn is immeasurable. 4.6 million people have come to the country and gone in the years that New Labour has been in, because people flow through, stay, stick a bit, go, reclaim, come back, and the number of people who leave the country increases at every moment.
In the last 12 to 13 years about 3 million of our people – and everyone knows who they are – have left the country to Spain, to Australia, to Canada, and elsewhere probably never to return and they’ve left because they see no difference between the Tory, Labour, and Liberal machines. The Liberals are the orange-yellow bit stuck in between the red and the blue that provide the ideas for both of the parties that claim to be uninfluenced by them.
So, both of them agree on movement of capital and movement of labor. Labour said there should be virtually no restrictions on immigration, and it appears that none too artificially but quite deliberately that New Labour between ’99 and 2003/4 opened mass immigration and opened it again and opened it again. Some say – The Sun and other organs of expertness allegedly – that it was even a conspiracy to do so, that they wanted to rub the noses of the Right, by which they meant the Tories, in it, that they wanted them to see the reality of multiculturalism in and around them.
You didn’t need to see multiculturalism in and around us before 1997. You could see it in Birmingham in the 1970s. You could see it in inner Glasgow in the 1980s. You could see it in inner Bristol in the 1950s. You could see it in southern and western London in the 1960s. You could see it in inner Cardiff in the mid- to late 1980s to early 1990s. You could see it in Manchester from the late 1960s.
I spoke in Leicestershire recently. Leicester is the first ethnic city. It is the first city where White European British people, English people, are in a minority. They are 48-49%. Add all the other groups together — and they have little in common with each other, particularly the Asians, many of whom committed genocide against each other in 1948 when India collapsed — yet aggregate them all together in Leicester and they are a majority. A majority! We’re now the minority in a major English city, and Birmingham will be soon, and every other city will go.
If you live in Norwich you’ll have to wait 20, 30, maybe even 50 years until it happens. But there’s a degree to which it’s happening. The cities are changing. The cities are becoming destinations of change. They’re becoming Second, Third, Fourth World zones. People pass through them. Two million British people go into London every day and leave as quickly as possible when the working day is over, because they don’t want to stay. Why don’t they want to stay in what was once the capital of an empire that ruled a quarter of the world? They don’t want to stay because large parts of inner western, eastern, southern, and northern London do not resemble anything like the city they knew when they were young.
The whole phenomenon of the Essex man, so-called, is a large number Cockney East-Enders who’ve moved out of the city to get away from the extraordinary changes which have occurred. Why else do you think in Tower Hamlets is the Respect candidate returned to the House of Commons? He supports Saddam Hussein’s Iraq before it was exploded by American power, supports Libya, supports Arabist causes all over the world, because the people who live in Tower Hamlets now, in a complicated sort of a way, have more in common with those causes than they do with the causes of the people here in Wigan or in other northern towns.
What’s happened to the society is that the elite has let the population go and looks elsewhere for succor and for support. Big capital and big unions are combining in a world economy with a would-be world elite that sees countries like England and Britain as stepping stones, stepping stones to their own careers in particular.
Blair is very like this. First, leader of the Labour Party, leader in opposition and then leader in government, then a leader of Britian, leader of possibly the European Union, but that was shot out of the water because of his support for the Iraq War. Then he was seeding for the idea of being head of the UN, head of the world almost in a slightly megalomaniacal progress. Although Blair wasn’t too confident when he appeared before the Chilcot Inquiry, which for those who don’t know is about the Iraq War and how we got into it.
The Iraq War has many causes and has been a disaster from beginning to end. Our men who fought in it fought bravely, but doubtless in a couple of years some of them will be on trial! Indeed, the briefs for the trials of quite a few officers are already being prepared, because not only are you fighting against mujahedeen in the alleys of Basra in southern Iraq in front of you, you’ve also got tricky human rights lawyers behind you who are watching for the slightest slip or indiscretion or beating of the occasional looter and that sort of thing, which in a vortex of hot struggle will always go on. And if there is some sort of evidence people will be arraigned before the courts. So, we go to war at America’s and, to a certain extent, Israel’s behest, we then engage in silly little witch trials of our own men for prosecuting wars a large section of the population didn’t support in the first instance and don’t support now anyway. Seventy-five percent say that they don’t support those wars.
These wars are very silly on many fronts, but the major one is you do not allow millions from the societies that you may then tend to invade at a later date to settle in your own country and then attack their societies, cultures, structures, states simultaneously. You either say, “No, you don’t come in,” or “You come in” and we don’t go to war, or you don’t go to war, but you don’t engage in a messy combination of all of those variables.
Liberals believe that everyone’s the same and everyone can come and stay and we can all get on because things that have existed in human life forever — tribal identity, group identity, individual pride, gender difference between men and women, conflict orientation, the struggles between peoples that have characterized man since the beginning of organized life — these things can be wished away — wished away as conceits, as “reactionary” views that progressive people don’t hold. Biology will trump all of that, because all humans come out of nature and go back into it.
The problem that we face is that the liberal ideas that govern our elite, whether they’re in the Liberal Party, the Tory Party, or the Labour Party, they all have liberal views. They all believe mass immigration is marvelous. They all believe the abolition of the death penalty is marvelous. They all believe that the European Union is something which should be supported. They all believe that these flags that you see around this auditorium are things that are just temporal, that just reflect the fact that this is a zone, it’s no different to any other country in Europe or further afield. They have no pride in being English. They have little pride in being British. They have little pride in being a White European. They support wars all over the world, but at the same time these people themselves lack the martial spirit.
The liberal elite that rules us is leading this country slowly to ruin and by the middle and to the end of this century we will be in a version of the Third World. There are White children in Hackney in inner North London who are 2 to 3 per class out of 30 to 35. Their culture will be totally disprivileged. They are an ethnic and racial minority in those areas. They will never, ever see those areas changed at least in their early lifetime. When Black history month is rolled out in Hackney in central North London, as it is across London and across the big cities, paid for by your money here in Wigan and Leigh and elsewhere, every White child learns it, and they’re a small racial minority now in these areas. No White history for them. And if you don’t have a coherent history that relates to you, you don’t have a presence, and if you don’t have a presence/present at this time you don’t have a future, and if you don’t have a future then there is really nothing for it and you will merge in gradually into what is coming, which is a large multiracial world splurging across what was once the West with a small elite that will include the elites of China and India and elsewhere.
We’re living in 2010. In 1910, we ruled a quarter of the world. There were many problems, but we were in some respects a great country. That’s why we are called Great Britain. Macmillan, who was a premier in the 1950s, wanted to do was do away with the term “Great Britain,” because he thought it was out of date and reactionary. We’re still called Great Britain. When you get your purple ribena-colored European Union passport . . . Remember the old British passport was blue, was big, you could hold it in your hand and it went around the hand. The European Union passport is a tiny, little thing that looks like a joke sort of passport. Something you get out of a Waddingtons game at Christmas. This is what this country’s been reduced to, a province of the European Union. And yet we’re still with America as we dither on the margins of Europe. And that is because we are besotted with liberal ideas, and it’s because we have a liberal elite who have misruled this society since at least 1948 when the Labour Party passed the Nationality Act which allowed the first waves of mass migration from the Third World to come into this country.
Again and again and again on issue after issue — economic, social, racial, anthropological, cultural, in relation to Ulster, in relation to European Union integration, in relation to crime and social disorder — the country has been let down and broken down, generationally, again and again.
Cameron talks about “broken Britain,” and he says that the society is broken. He talks about certain cases such as the Bulger case, which has come back into the news recently, as exemplifying the fact that Britain is broken. Well, he’s right. Britain has a strong crack running through the surface of it. There’s a breakage in British society to which the Tories manfully contributed in the 1980s when the height of a massive depression they deflated, and they cut public spending at the height of the curve as the depression went down and unemployment in areas like this and right across the north of England and right across the Midlands went from 2.5 to 3 to 5 to even 8 million.
The Tories talk about a “broken Britain” and yet they devastated large parts of the north of England such as here in the 1980s, which has not been forgotten here. It’s why the Tories are so hated in these areas and why, although many people are now receptive to Right-wing views, they will never accept them in a Tory manner.
I want to say something about the Bulger case and the fact that people think it’s exemplificatory of the country’s decline. Here you have two psychopaths, Venables and Thompson. Both of them are children. Both of them take a baby from a Liverpudlian or Bootle shopping center and murder him in the cruelest and most sadistic manner possible. Both of them then get 8 years in a special unit. Both of them are then released ahead of time and contrary to what the public’s instincts want.
My general view is that it would have been illicit to hang Venables and Thompson when they were children. That’s done in China; it’s done in Iran; it’s done in North Korea. We’re not those sorts of societies. However, to hang them when they were 18, instead of releasing them into the public, irrespective of Venables return to custody, I think would have been a morally efficacious thing to do. Both would be sentient; both would have been adult; both would have spent 8 years in prison; both would have had to dwell on the prospect of what was coming for them; both would have known and at least understood so far as psychopaths can the reality of what they had done.
I know people who have worked at Broadmoor. I know people who have seen the files about the injuries that were inflicted upon that toddler. I’ve known people who do not wish to talk about the nature of the murder that was committed. I think their execution when they were 18 rather than their release into the general population and their giving of new identities is a good thing. Liberals believe that they can be cured and redeemed, because they believe that love conquers all and if only they had better childhoods they would have had better outcomes. The victim is nearly always offstage by the time this sort of discourse begins.
They believe that human nature can change. The nature of these psychopaths cannot change. Even if they do not commit new crimes, they will not alter, because psychopaths are born the way that they are.
What’s a psychopath? We’re getting slightly off the message of normal politics here, but psychopaths believe that a human life is that of an ant and can be stamped on just in one go. Psychopaths believe that rape is normal sex. Psychopaths believe that destruction is goodness and morality. Psychopaths in Broadmoor or Ashworth, which is the equivalent hospital up here, fight against each other all the time, despite all the psychotropic drugs they’re on in order to secure who’s the most dominant, the most vicious, who’s killed more, who’s eaten the ones that he’s killed. These people can’t be cured, and it’s only false liberal theories that think that they can.
They way to deal with these sorts of things is to close Rampton, which is the Midlands equivalent, or Carstairs, which is the Scottish equivalent, or Broadmoor, which is the most famous hospital of this sort in the world and is the southern equivalent, and Ashworth, where Ian Brady, the moors murderer still is, which is the northern equivalent. You have execute these people and close these institutions down, because there is no hope for them, and there is some recompense for the families of their victims if a solution such as this is affected.
Now, if this was done, the majority parties would scream in outrage about the human rights of these people, about the civic nature of the society, about being uncivilized by supporting the death penalty for individuals of this sort. But in actual fact the instincts of the population here are right, and the liberal feelings of the elite are incorrect. Because although the people feel leaderless and they feel powerless by virtue of what they see beaming out of the television on a nightly basis, most of their instincts about the matters I’ve brought up in the early parts of this speech are true.
Most people want to get out of the European Union; most people would like England and Britain to be proud once again; most people are sick of Labour but don’t want the Tories; most people would like a government that had a sense of social justice but a deep sense of social conservatism tied together by patriotism; most of us would like to unshackle ourselves from the United States and their wars across the world; most of us would like this country to be different and better. We would like it to be less crime- and drug-ridden; we would like it to be more White; we would like it to be safer for older people who’ve often served this country well in past generations and many of whom are now frightened of the society which is now growing around them. Why should they be frightened? Why should older people worry about going into a town or a city center after 6 o’clock Friday or Saturday evening? Even if lot of it’s in the mind, why should they be worried? These are people who’ve built this country. Everyone’s got older relatives. Everyone has a mother and a father. Everyone has a family. Everyone has an extended family. Why should people be frightened in their own society of yobbery and of crime?
Crime needs to be punished with severity. Yobs birched and put in the army. These are the sort of things that you need to do if you want to turn this country around. If you want it to go down and further down into a liberal pit and to be pretty much a rubbish dump by the end of this century, continue on the road that you’re going down, but if you want it to turn around, people have got to do something radical rather than just talking and drinking. They’ve got to vote. They’ve got to get out. They’ve got to leaflet. They’ve got to electioneer. They’ve got to come up here and make a few speeches.
And understand all the laws that have been passed to prevent people having free speech on these matters and find a way around them. We’re a people of wit; we’re a people of conceit. In the Elizabethan period, we were one of the wittiest people on Earth. We should be able to find a way around these laws which have been passed to gag us. Every time I speak, I am aware there’s 10, 12, 15 laws that have been passed just under New Labour alone — on race, on culture, on religion, on gender equality, on transsexual equality, on sexual equality, on sexuality equality, on every form of equality going — in order to prevent people from saying what I am saying somewhat obliquely about the nature of the problems that face this society. One has to speak obliquely because of the laws which have been passed beginning with the Race Act under Wilson in the late 1960s, becoming the acts which created the Commission for Sexual and Racial Equality in the early 1970s under Wilson again and Callaghan later, then mushrooming under Blair into this whole bureaucracy which is now headed by Trevor Phillips.
Trevor Phillips gets £100 million a year of your money to run his bureaucracy in the middle of London which has imposed the idea of “ethnic Britons” and without the quotation marks joining this organization for reasons of equity to fulfill European Union statutes, for reasons of human rights law, and so on. The party, realizing it was on a losing wicket fought back but moved back the way a retreating army under heavy and percussive fire has to do, taking a few losses, and trying to make the best of what is a bad situation which is designed to divide it and to lose it money.
Phillips won’t succeed in his endeavors, but he knows what he’s doing, and his endeavor is that people in Wigan do not have a voice; people in Leigh do not have a voice; people have no voice other than Labour, and if they don’t like that they don’t vote at all. This is the idea.
And if they get stroppy there’s a new working class in Asia and in Africa and in Polynesia and in Eurasia and in the Latino countries of Latin and Central America that can be brought in in their stead. Twenty to 60 constituencies are already controlled by the ethnic vote. Ninety percent of Afro-Caribbeans and persons of African origin, diaspora Blacks, whatever, vote Labour. Ninety percent if they vote at all! Of Asians it’s 50-70% always vote Labour. The ones who don’t are primarily alienated because of wars that they’ve fought on Israel and America’s behalf against the Islamic world. These are ethnic blocs that vote Labour. That’s why the Labour candidate for Barking in East London says she doesn’t care about White working class people. She says, “We don’t represent them anymore. They can go away.”
This is the Labour Party that she is representing. The Labour Party that was set up to represent such people in 1900. Was stood up by the Trades Union Congress who financed the Labour Representation Committee out of which the Labour Party came. That’s why people around Wigan and Leigh are so fanatically loyal even now in part, particularly older people, to the Labour Party. There are many people around here who will say, “I agree with what he’s saying sort of, but I’m Labour, you know? Labour ’til I die. Cut me open and it’s red. Red is the color. Labour forever!” And yet Labour have betrayed the people in these areas with the exception of social welfare on issue after issue after issue. And still people vote Labour. And still they go on returning Labour MPs in Wigan, in Leigh, and in other places. It’s only when they stop doing so, it’s only when an explosion occurs such as took place in the European Union parliament a year or so ago, that people turn around and notice.
This society is changing. In the European Union elections, one million people voted for the British Nationalist Party; 2.25-2.5 million voted for the New Labour Party. Labour is the governing party and they only got two-and-a-half times what a radical party which is demonized by every other tendency of opinion was able to achieve. When Labour politicians sit in Whitehall and look at that, they realize that their own core electoral base is turning on them. They realize that they are in danger in their core areas. No one is going to vote Tory here, but a large number of them may well vote for the British National Party and put people in! As Blunkett said when he was Home Secretary about 10 or 12 years ago, “Wherever that party wins, the present set-up is in danger.”
Britain may be broken, but the breakers of Britain themselves break when this party wins, particularly when the former leader of the National Front, Andrew Brons, was elected to the European parliament. The nausea amongst New Labour supporters that that thing created . . . They were choking with the emotion of it, the negative emotion of it, the night of that victory on radio and television beamed across the world. This is the impact that these sorts of votes can have and ought to have from now and into the future.
Many British men are fighting tonight in Afghanistan. They’re fighting in Helmand, which is a desert in southeast Afghanistan with a jungle in the middle of it. You go out of the desert and into the jungle and you’re into full on violence. The violence that they’re experiencing is equivalent to the severest fighting in the Korean War, which the Gloucestershire Regiment engaged in in the early 1950s with some detachments from Ulster and elsewhere and, of course, South Korean and American allies. They were fighting against Maoists from China and North Korean troops who would behead any prisoner and cut their head off and cut their eyes out. That’s what war involves. That’s what sometimes happens to people if they’re captured by Taliban in Helmand.
Now, this war is unwinnable, and our politicians know that it is, and they believe that if we leave now Al-Qaeda will come back, this network that flew the planes into the towers and into the Pentagon a decade ago and changed the nature of the world. However, my contention and the contention of this party, is that you don’t destroy Al-Qaeda by bludgeoning a Third World state like Afghanistan where they’re born gun in hand, where they fight for every valley, and where as the Berkshire Regiment proved in the 1890s never mind now they basically can’t be conquered in their own territory. They move away from you if you’re too powerful, they put roadside bombs, today’s weapon of choice, in the way and then they come back when you’re gone.
The way to defeat these insurgent movements is to get amongst them with Special Forces, is to know where they are, is to destabilize them using the Special Boat Service and the Special Air Service. These are the people that you use. You don’t invade a country. You remove yourself. And if they threaten our streets and if they bring their bombs and bullets and explosives here we make sure we have Special Forces to deal with them. That’s how you fight irregular paramilitary guerrilla war. You do it cleverly and with pluck rather than some bludgeoning sort of a way which at its worst replicates what the United States did in Vietnam, mass terror bombing and the rest of it and then you lose, and then you leave humiliated as they were forced to in a way that’s rarely mentioned now I notice.
We must fight our own wars that are in our own interests not in America’s interests. We’re not a satellite of the United States. We should be a proud and independent middle-ranking country.
Argentina is growling again, because more oil than is in the North Sea has been discovered off the Falklands, thereby proving those dissidents that said 30 years ago when I was a very young man that the Falklands War was fought about fuel. The Falklands War couldn’t be fought now, because we don’t have the navy to do it by virtue of the fact that we’ve declined as a society to such a degree since then. Sixteen thousand men have fought under our colors in the micro-wars since 1945 and have perished doing so. The purpose of this party in this era — not ’45 and before, but in the era that we are alive — is to make sure that those 16,000 deaths were not in vain and that their widows and relatives were not left in want for nothing at all, that these flags that you see around you in this auditorium this evening here in the north of England mean something, that when a soldier is buried and his casket is draped with these symbols it actually means something to those who are left and will follow them and it will hope to see a government which represents them in the future, a government that will be more British, more glorious, in some ways kinder, in others harsher than what exists at the moment.
In all areas of life Britain is in decline and needs a shake-up, and this is the only political party which envisages it in a manner which is possible for us at this time. I ask you to get out and leaflet for this party, to help to pay for its election expenses in this night here in Wigan. I ask you to give your support to the candidates who come forward to stand in Wigan, Leigh, and elsewhere. I ask you to make sure that when the ballot is before you, you vote for the British National Party, your parents do, your immediate family does, your extended family does, and you tell people at work and you tell people socially that you voted for this party. You don’t say when somebody asks you and you did vote for the British National Party, “No, no, no. I voted Labour,” or “I don’t know. I sorta voted for some independent,” or “I didn’t vote anyway,” or “It was raining. I didn’t turn out” and that sort of thing. You say with a degree of pride that you voted for this party. You voted for Britain’s future and for its children. Think of those children in Hackney. Think of them too White for a class that is not. Think of what that will be like 50 years from now, 70 years from now, 130 years from now if no changes are made.
So, there’s a degree to which Wigan will follow where Hackney has gone. There is no escape. Each area of the country lags in various ways. 30 years, 50 years, 40 years, 20 years behind the Leicesters that I talked of earlier. Don’t sort of pity the people of Leicester. Look to what has happened there as an example. And Birmingham as well. If anyone wants to see what this country has become go to the center of London for a day — it’s only a day trip — stand in Piccadilly Circus, look at the nine elevators going up and down, look at the fact that 90% of the people on them are from elsewhere in the world and see Britain’s future demographically there, unless something is done.
The Tories say there will be a cap. It is meaningless! Meaningless! They’ve said these things for 40 years. When Enoch Powell made the speeches in the late 1960s, the whole world heard and England heard. Here was a man who was an academic, who was an intellectual, many of his audiences didn’t in all truth have that much in common with him, but they understood instinctively what he was saying. When soccer fans chanted his name throughout the early 1970s everybody knew! Everybody knew what he meant! And isn’t Enoch Powell right? Wasn’t he right in what he said? Wasn’t he right in what he said about the nature of this country and what would happen in relation to the next couple of decades? He died a while back, but the future which is coming to bear upon us all here in Wigan and Leigh and elsewhere is such a one that his memory and the memory of the people of the National Front of the 1970s and the memory of the people who founded the British National Party, many of whom were more radical than the present policies of this party because this party has had to moderate to adapt to the circumstances of the democracy in which it finds itself . . .
I want the BNP vote in this election, which will be 6 weeks from now, to be bigger than last time. I want it to be bigger than last time in the north of England, in the south of England, in the east of England, in the west of England, in Scotland, in Wales, and even tangentially in Ulster. I will ask you for the last time to put your hands in your pockets later this evening to support this party so that it can run candidates to get bigger votes in the three constituencies around you.
Thank you very much!