Greater London Assembly Elections 2000

Manifesto for the Greater London Authority elections


April 2000


As a result of the policies of successive governments, the capital city of the United Kingdom is decreasingly recognisable as a British city. The endless flood of immigrants into Britain has concentrated particularly heavily in London and the South East - responsible estimates of the numbers of illegal immigrants alone arrive at a figure of towards one million. Government policy for decades has been to downplay the entire matter and its effects. The influx has been particularly heavy during the last five years. Immigration is the main reason for the present programme of mass building on green field sites as reusable land in the city is exhausted. Within another generation, without political change, London will not even be recognisable as a European city.

The remaining British people in London are faced with progressive marginalisation in their own capital city, constantly fuelled by the main political parties and media who blatantly favour the interests of anyone from anywhere else in the world above their own citizens. Politicians from the main parties are imprisoned by fear of accusations of 'racism'. The British within the capital are being denuded of any pride they might once have felt in themselves, their nation and capital - we are now second-class citizens.

Employment availability in London is loaded against many British people in favour of foreigners by a range of techniques - something to which the Government would never admit. 'Positive discrimination' is nothing more nor less than anti-white racism. British citizens now also have to live with constant fear of crime - street crimes like muggings have rocketed in numbers in recent years.

The main parties' response to the marginalisation of the British in their own capital has taken two forms - vilification of anyone who criticises their policies, and deceit and denial as to the abundantly evident effects of their actions.


What is needed is the election of voices speaking on behalf of the British people throughout the country - but most urgently in the capital. Those voices will never again arise from the numbers of the present-day main political parties, from whose ranks common sense and the upholding of public decency has long departed. They can come only from a new political organisation like the British National Party prepared to withstand the avalanche of lies and abuse directed towards any one who suggests that the British people should continue to exist, and to retain their unique identity.

The new arrangements establishing a Greater London Assembly and London mayor have abandoned the first-past-the-post system which has made entry to government of new parties so difficult in the past. The new system of transferable votes and party list representation helps to undermine the 'wasted vote' argument which has proved such a handicap in broadening out the range of viewpoints heard within elected forums. New parties can establish an influence not only by winning but also by participating in elections.


The new body which is being elected on May 4 has its formal powers limited to specific areas like transport and policing. Much of its work will be of a purely technical nature, constrained by bureaucratic necessities, and it is likely that the public will find itself disappointed when inflated claims made by vote-seeking parties prove unrealisable in practice. Its political influence, as the White Paper which preceded the legislation admitted, however, will extend far outside its formal remit because of its role in governing the capital.

Thus those elected, and particularly the mayor, will be in a position to alter the political landscape in areas where no direct powers are given to them. For that reason the British National Party's manifesto directs itself to a wider range of policy areas than the restricted list of matters to be formally within GLA control. It is vital that the core interests and values of British society should be represented in the GLA. This will certainly not be the case if it is exclusively composed of representatives of the existing parties or their fellow travellers.

The GLA must conduct itself responsibly and not employ its extensive patronage to dispense political favours. Employment both of individuals and firms should be based exclusively on ability to provide the best value and service to the public. Recent suggestions by one candidate that firms should be granted contracts on the basis of the political views of their proprietors, for example, are not a responsible basis for expenditure of public money.


The first principle on which we stand for election is a pledge to support London as the capital of our country, with all that implies in terms of upholding the character of the city as British in its culture, identity and traditions. British people in the capital should no longer be forced to see themselves as second-class, and to be made to feel that some wrong is being inflicted if they work to support their interests. The massive injustice of 'political correctness', its bullying and duplicity, and anti-white racism, must come to an end. We want our pride back.

The British National Party believes that action must be taken urgently and immediately by government to remove illegal immigrants from London. That would be welcomed by the vast majority of those who live in the capital. The epidemic of professional beggars from abroad in London is a particular symptom of the ineptitude of the current governing political parties, and their indifference to the opinions of the law-abiding majority.


Law and order in the capital is being destroyed by the malign influence of mainstream politicians, and the practice of appointing senior Metropolitan Police Service officers on a political basis. Who can doubt that the recent surge in street crime is related to police fears of seeming 'politically incorrect'?

It is no exaggeration to say that serving police officers fear for their careers and pensions if they pursue impartial, fair but firm law enforcement. London's police have suffered an inevitable collapse in morale as a result. Career advancement no longer depends on the proper enforcement of the law, but on adherence to clap-trap theories and practices, like obsessively enforced speech codes, which have replaced it.

Ironically, those who suffer the most as a result of crime are often those supposed to be the beneficiaries of a 'politically correct' police culture. All of us living in London, black or white, are the losers.

The British National Party's policy is to renew police morale, and re-establish law and order, by fully supporting the police providing the service upholds the basic principle of the rule of law - impartiality. If police officers are to be given training concerning their general conduct then any such training should concern a proper and polite carrying out of the duties imposed by their oath, not the bizarre requirements of left-wing theories about society.

We believe that 'zero tolerance' policing needs to be introduced to the capital at least until civilised conditions have been restored. The new Police Commissioner has encouragingly indicated an intention in that regard, but we must question the extent to which any such policy will, in fact, be carried through when the politicians holding overall responsibility have by their own actions in the past allowed our present condition to arise. Candidates standing for the old parties, for example, have made clear their support for abandonment of any normal standard of public decency in their remarks about the desirability of homosexual activities being permitted in public places.


Because of the size of London's economy, questions of economic development have far wider implications than would be the case for a small conurbation. The development of London's economy has massive implications for development elsewhere.

It is a fact of economic life that successful areas become more successful, since the advantage to business of operating in those areas outweighs any likely reduction in costs if investment is made in less successful regions. That is particularly true of London, where GDP per capita is a quarter higher than elsewhere. Thus we risk in London and the South East congested conditions of life which are unsatisfactory to many living there as a result of the very success of those areas.

At the same time, some parts of the capital are deprived in economic terms. Some sectors of the economy, like financial services, are constrained by availability of skilled workers while there is substantial joblessness among the less-skilled - often compounded by the disincentive of low wages. This structural problem in the economy is nation wide, and has no easy answer.

Certainly, the new GLA can contribute something by improving the infrastructure and general attractiveness of deprived areas, but the core structural difficulty lies outside the power of the GLA to substantially alleviate. It cannot be assumed that attracting investment will do much for the local unemployed - investment is often likely to benefit those from outside who can offer the higher level of skills required by employers.

Thus sections of London's teeming population suffer far higher levels of unemployment than is popularly perceived, while some sectors thrive. There is a vital strategic decision to be made in partnership with government concerning the welfare of the country's economy as a whole. If attempts are made to supply a sufficient economic base to employ adequately those in areas of very high population density, two consequences follow. Other areas of the country which are less successful are deprived of a fair share of investment, and the congested areas attract even more people to them in a vicious circle.

The British National Party therefore believes that the work of the new London Development Agency should take account of the wider implications of London's economic development, and be prepared to act taking account of the interests of the country as a whole.

We also wish to see London's new government taking every possible measure to diminish the disadvantages suffered by British people seeking employment in the capital. Particularly serious is the system of indirect discrimination against British workers operated in the form of age limits on jobs. Age limits massively disadvantage the majority of British workers in favour of foreign workers, as the Government intends. The operations of the 'political correctness' lobby intensify the disadvantages suffered by British workers, who lack a voice speaking effectively on their behalf.


Everyone knows that London is desperately congested, and that its transport system is unreliable and inadequate. There is no dispute concerning the need for massive investment in the Underground system, both to improve its functioning as a rail system, and also because rail transport assists in reducing traffic on the roads. Reluctance to use public transport for fear of crime needs to be addressed if investment is to have its full effect in reducing road traffic.

The current debate concerning funding investment in the Tube attempts to arrive at a definitive conclusion about the merits of the money being raised by state borrowing or private enterprise. Since the merits of the two cases depend on factors like possible cost overruns, who bears the losses, and unquantifiable savings proceeding from private management of investment projects, which will only be known in the outturn of events once the programme in under way, it is impossible to make a decision which can be guaranteed to be correct. Much also depends on the detail of contracts made with the private sector. Confident statements about the best approach, made by candidates without any of the detailed knowledge available only at present to the Government, form no basis upon which the public can draw any adequate conclusions.

The contention that investment costs can be met from private sources is obviously attractive from a political viewpoint. Taxpayers do not wish to be told that they face further direct burdens. Unfortunately, the Government has already conceded that public money will be necessary since the combined resources available from surpluses of transport revenues over costs and private funding will be insufficient.

What matters is that the updating of the tube should take place as speedily as possible. The costs, whichever route is taken in funding investment, represent over a period of years the very smallest fraction of London's economic product.

We do not favour a system of management of the Underground which splits responsibility between private firms and public bodies. We believe that the system should continue to be run in public hands as a public service. The experience of passengers suggests a long-standing lack of dynamism in public management of the system. The new arrangements under which London Transport is to replaced by Transport for London offers the opportunity for a new start.

Road traffic, like taxes, is an area in which it is impossible for government to please. Everyone wishes to use their own cars, while often wishing others to have their usage restricted in the interests of the environment. The British National Party believes that issues of that nature lend themselves to consultation with the public in the form of referenda.

There is a risk, for example, that measures taken to control the numbers of vehicles on the roads, in the absence of direct consultation, arrive at a political compromise which proves ineffective in its original objectives while pleasing few. Road pricing schemes, if introduced, must not become merely an overhead charge to motorists built into their incomes, with little effect on traffic, while providing a easy source of revenue for London's government coated with a righteous veneer of green values. There appears to be a degree of refusal to admit how essential the flexibility of road transport is to those conducting business in the capital.

It is likely that the current proposal for road pricing in the centre of the capital, if in fact implemented, will worsen congestion unless public transport capacity is radically improved in advance of its implementation. Ill thought out schemes provoked by a wish to create headlines in newspapers are now a common feature of a political life in Britain which is often driven by the media rather than by responsible governance.

We also draw attention to the fact that road congestion is partly the result of a wish by much of the workforce to commute, in view of the unattractive conditions of life in the centre of the capital.


Major factors impacting on the conditions of life in London are those addressed above - crime, illegal immigration, and general congestion. These issues are much more important, and for the majority make a far bigger impact on their lives than what is usually included in the expression 'environment'.

We may well eventually arrive at a capital with cleaner air - but one which few wish to inhabit for other reasons. That is one of the imbalances in thinking about London's future which arises in a situation where debate is hemmed in by a network of restrictions justified by the present politically correct culture which dictates that nothing should be said which may be claimed to give offence to any minority group.


The British National Party seeks to renew the cultural identity of the British people which is under constant attack as the culture of a society faulty in its fundamentals. The GLA should direct its opportunities for cultural development to that end.

Although education is not an area to be placed under GLA control, that body should try to encourage educational policies which do not reduce the majority ethnic group within schools in Britain as a whole to what has been described as 'cultural ghosts' by one London borough.

We wish to see provision of a wider range of different types of school according to the cultural preferences of parents. White children from poorer backgrounds have been disgracefully abandoned by politicians eager to ingratiate themselves with what are still described as 'minority groups' - even where they, in fact, make up the majority.

The GLA should also celebrate the family as the core unit underpinning our culture and identity. That would be welcomed by most people, whatsover their origins.

With more than three hundred tongues spoken in London, the capital needs an English voice.