Skeddan Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I read that as his attempt to fog the issue by introducing uncertainty and giving people plausible deniability if asked. It's not clear whether that is what Griffin said or whether that is the interpretation the Times put on this. It's a fair reading, but even if this was the reason, this has much wider significance. It is not 'just' a membership list - but is a list with sensitive personal information that probably is protected under Data Protection Act - whereas a pure and simple list of members of an unincorporated association probably isn't. Someone who gets fired as a result of their employer using this list could possibly have a pretty strong case - even if they are actually a member of BNP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It is not 'just' a membership list - but is a list with sensitive personal information that probably is protected under Data Protection Act - whereas a pure and simple list of members of an unincorporated association probably isn't. Someone who gets fired as a result of their employer using this list could possibly have a pretty strong case - even if they are actually a member of BNP. I would agree with that. Knowingly accessing and using information from such a list is surely is an offence, as would be reproducing any part of it on here for example. Whether you agree with their views or not is irrelevant with regard to data protection. Equally, IMO, that old saying 'I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death to allow you to say it' applies here...they are still entitled to the same protection under the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I hope not. I know that our elderly accountant no longer lives at the address listed and I'd hate to see anyone attacked because of info on that list.Anyone reposting it could always add a few more names of people they didn't like and had a grudge against. People move? They will now. (Bit like the sex offenders list) I would imagine that 'whoever is investigating' would have to prove that the person that is stated on the list, is actually 100% a member, i.e, just because a persons name is on the list, wouldn't automatically mean that those persons are members, unless they have copies of two way communication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Partridge Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Despite what people may feel or think, the BNP is a legal political party. Membership of it should not be a reason to be fired from your job, at least legally anyway. After my attempts at discussing the BNP in another thread, I realise the depth of feeling against them after being told to get back to Britain etc. (Strange since I'm Manx?) I'm prepared to accept that there is a racist element yet they seem to insist that they are not? Oh well, perhaps this issue will bring the whole of the facts to light about the party and it's true intentions and policies. Everyone will then be able to see them for who or what they are, be it for good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knoxville Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Someone PM me link for the list please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 As are the people listed on 'Redwatch'. According to Griffin 'Redwatch' is nothing to do with the NF. Lying bastard. He, Griffin, also says the list is not an accurate membership list, ergo it's just a list of names and addresses, so could be freely published? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Despite what people may feel or think, the BNP is a legal political party. Membership of it should not be a reason to be fired from your job, at least legally anyway. The police aren't allowed to be BNP members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If I employed anyone on that list I would fire them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubar Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If I employed anyone on that list I would fire them. Then you would probably be sued by said employee for unlawful dismissal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Partridge Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Despite what people may feel or think, the BNP is a legal political party. Membership of it should not be a reason to be fired from your job, at least legally anyway. The police aren't allowed to be BNP members. I agree, since their employer has made it plain that they should not be a member. I do wonder though why so many people seem desperate to know who is on the list? I know a couple of people from the UK who visit the island regularly who say they are members, I would never associate them with having extreme views before this. They actually are quite intelligent proffessionals so I am finding the whole thing a bit confusing really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If I employed anyone on that list I would fire them. Then you would probably be sued by said employee for unlawful dismissal. Very well could be. I would agree with that. Knowingly accessing and using information from such a list is surely is an offence, as would be reproducing any part of it on here for example. If it is covered by the Data Protection Act (as it may well be since not just a simple membership list), then it goes further than this. It would be an offence just to obtain the list - e.g. by downloading it or opening the website. 55 Unlawful obtaining etc. of personal data (1) A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller— (a) obtain .... personal data or the information contained in personal data However that does not apply to a person who shows "that he acted in the reasonable belief that he had in law the right to obtain or disclose the data or information" Now note how the BNP have shifted from this being a membership list (which IMO would be ok to obtain and is not personal information, but rather BNP information). Now it is coming out it is more than that. I think Merseyside police may be taking action against someone whose name appears on 'the list'. BNP might have a field-day with all this. I would imagine that 'whoever is investigating' would have to prove that the person that is stated on the list, is actually 100% a member, i.e, just because a persons name is on the list, wouldn't automatically mean that those persons are members, unless they have copies of two way communication. It could even mean that they cannot use the list in any way - even to use it as basis to conduct an investigation that a person may be a BNP member. With police, prison service, armed forces etc. they are public authorities under Human Rights Act, so becomes even more sticky if they use the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I do wonder though why so many people seem desperate to know who is on the list? It's the skeet yessir, the skeet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 After my attempts at discussing the BNP in another thread, I realise the depth of feeling against them after being told to get back to Britain etc. (Strange since I'm Manx?) I'm prepared to accept that there is a racist element yet they seem to insist that they are not? So you're prepared to believe that the BNP ARE racist, but you claim their own literature says they are NOT. If they ARE racist, then they are clearly lying, which must surely tell you something about them. If they are NOT racist, then why are you prepared to believe that they ARE? It's a strange way for a friend to behave. When I am approached for a donation for research into brain replacement surgery I shall respond most generously on your behalf. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If I employed anyone on that list I would fire them. Then you would probably be sued by said employee for unlawful dismissal. As it would be, worth the insurance I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 This site has a report from back in 2006: Leading activist Brian Hunter was one of the 36 strong team looking for potential House of Keys candidates to stand on behalf of the far right group, and attempting to garner support for their controversial policies from local people. He told Energy FM a benefactor on the Isle of Man named Peter Dawson had helped organise the visit by UK members, after an alleged upsurge of local interest in the party. http://iomelections.com/2006/news/news014.html Does anyone know if this is the same Peter Dawson who is Chairman of the Isle of Man branch of the Royal British Legion, and perhaps also member of the Military Police Association Isle of Man subgroup? ETA: This question has now been answered - "Definitely nothing to do with that Peter Dawson - who is a true gentleman in every sense of the word." (Leaving this as it answers any confusion or questions anyone else might have). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.