I do hope the report isn't going to blame the rise of extremism on "Tory cuts" and gloss over the last few years of high immigration, falling w-class employment, unfair welfare practices and a divisive cultural policy.

Interesting. I'd be very interested to get the link to the yougov poll that suggests this ... can you send it? it would certainly contradict other yougov polls such as the one on page 9 of this essay by Goodwin and Ford which suggests that 42% of the BNP vote in Euro'09 was over 55 compared to 17% under-35:- http://nottingham.academia.edu/MatthewGoodwin/Papers/305667/Anti-immigrant_politically_disaffected_or_still_racist_after_all_Examining_the_attitudinal_drivers_of_extreme_right_support_in_the_2009_European_Elections

The report was not directed at the Conservatives. It is a challenge to any mainstream politician who has turned their backs on the people who once built our industries and fought our wars, and now have been left behind by globalisation.

We do not ignore the fact that some anger towards immigration is racist - we outline data that confirms this point. However, we are trying to get beyond the idea that everyone who raises immigration is a racist. We want to understand the motivations of a large number of perfectly reasonably voters who are not racist in their attitudes but are angry with mainstream politics. How do we bring them back before a distasteful form of popular nationalism takes a grip of British politics, as it has done elsewhere in Europe, poisoning the political discourse with extremism, confrontation and intolerance?

Our intention is not to smear anyone. And the booklet goes out of its way to distinguish between the two. Page 7: "... we view UKIP as being a wholly credible and respectable organisation. The BNP on the other hand is an unpleasant and racist party which we hope to see defeated wherever it fights elections".

Paul, a note about that 5m figure. At the 2009 European elections, the vote for BNP and UKIP combined was 3,441,824, 22.7% of the vote. Given that the turn-out was just 35%, it is reasonable to assume that there are about 5m people who have left the mainstream and have some propensity to vote BNP or UKIP. It is difficult to define precisely the size of this cohort and I'd be interested if anyone else has got views on a more precise method of definition.

It is true that the old National Front attracted a young vote, but the modern BNP relies on an older 45+, male, relatively-under-educated voter. Details can be found in this article by Matt Goodwin and Robert Ford, "who votes BNP". http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9248

Anyone's who's canvassed one of those houses with 10+ votes in a tiny little house will know there's something to these allegations. and that we're going to have to spend some money modernising our out-dated system for the sake of democracy.

is something planned for central government?

I quite agree. Plenty of people find other people's habits distasteful or even unsettling. My god-daughter's piercings and tatoos are not everyone's cup of tea. But there is no need to resort to the authoritarianism of the BNP to redress these feelings. James Bethell, Director of There's Nothing British about the BNP.

Good to see Hugo Swire get a lollipop. He was treated harshly over the museums gaffe-ette.

For too long we have have been told that if you talk about subjects such as immigration you are a bigot, that you are just legitimising the BNP. But by demonising voters’ legitimate fears Gordon Brown has inadvertently endorsed Nick Griffin’s argument that Britain’s political classes hold ordinary people in contempt. No wonder the BNP are making such a big deal of this incident.

It is wrong to pay or solicit for “cash for access”. In these days of government transparency, most credible parties can get to see pretty much the right people when they need to. Though many believe that they shd be seeing the Chancellor, in fact they shd probbbly be seeing some middle-ranking civil servant, and these people are generally happy to chat about the issues. I think there is a line crossed when companies or lobbyists suggest that payments can somehow open doors. From what i saw on the grainy video i wondered whether Byers had crossed that line.

A lot of people are re-assuring themselves with this thought, but they should remember that the BNP will be a lot easier to defeat while they remain on the periphery of mainstream politics and it'll be a lot harder if they make any progress.

Regarding the costs, the BNP has turned over about £800k-£900k pa in the last few years according to the Electoral Commission accounts (which are often out of date). This is before the new EP money brought in by Brons and Griffin (though there are restrictions on how this can be spent). So a potential payment of £60k, as reported, will be a damaging pre-election cost item. The courts may adjudicate the sum downwards. But there might be further costs if Judge Paul Collins objects to Griffins (unilateral) determination to re-open the membership list come what may, signalled in an email to supporters tonight. There is considerable financial pressure on Griffin because, despite the contribution of various minor commercial ventures, membership fees remain the main source of income for the BNP. Since the EHRC first wrote to the BNP, a backlog of 1,000s of membership applications (and their cheques) have built up in the party's in-tray (Griffin claims today a 7,000 backlog). http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/letter_before_claim.pdf. But these legal costs are tiny compared to the publicity. The reporting of this hi-vis use of court authority provides valuable airtime for the BNP, particularly since the press cannot hide their own equivocal feelings about the court's application of race law on the indirect implications of the policy commitments of a political party with elected parliamentarians and councillors. The courts and anyone cheering them on should show some restraint at this point. And where are our politicians? I would much prefer that mainstream politicians were taking more time to make the moral, policy and personal case against the BNP and its leaders instead of leaving their dirty work to the judges, a decision which I fear will back-fire in the future.

Stephan, great stuff. You seem to making speedy progress on these important points. The question I am asked most often is, how much does this all cost? The answers I receive from PBA advocates haven't so far been plausible - that it is simply a question of running out some spreadsheets and putting them on the Net. FOI requests, for instance, are quite expensive and the government charges applicants for anything over £450 (£600 for central government). I appreciate that the FOI system is clunky and administrative, but it gives a sense of scale. The BBC estimates that FOI requests cost £3m out of their +/- £3bn budget. Putting data into a meaningful format for useful manipulation is a challenge that many big organisations invest heavily to get right, and often struggle before they succeed. I am thinking, NHS super-computer, ID database, passport management, the loss of sensitive Home Office data, etc. I think the cost question is going to become a major issue and I wondered if you had ideas for how government can overcome this potential obstacle to the implementation of an important idea?

A thorough speech which supports the contention that there's more policy on the Tory shopping list than you'd expect. Only, isn't a little strange that Damian has to go all the way to Dublin to give this speech? Aren't some of the +/-30% of people who rate immigration as their #1 policy concern allowed to hear his views?

Well said, Tariq. Policies are important. But I would add to your rallying call that it is important that politicians of all parties make the MORAL case against the extremism and racism of the BNP and its surrogate organisations.

Well done, Sam. One of the nicest guys on the circuit.

Well done. It was an excellent campaign executed with determination and elegance. The Isaby name is now feared by those advocating needless change and the erosion of proud traditions.

HDZ is a star - I used to work with him. Gove's office is becoming the hot-house for talent.

I can't afford to pay for the report. But I bet there are some areas where people's views have not become more "liberal". Crime. Patriotism. Support for the military. Concern about the effects of immigration. And suspiction of politicians. There is an important new book which analyses the causes of extremism (the new extemism in the 21st century - Goodwin and Eatwell) which publishes all the relevant opinion poll research on these subjects. It concludes with the thought that there is a deep well of support for the sort of policies of extreme organsisations like the BNP and the EDL. We are not a country at ease with itself - the tensions were evident at the riots in Stoke last weekend. And the fault is the Labour government's because they have consistently refused to give voters a choice on some of the government's biggest decisions and they have neglected those families that have lost out to the economic and cultural effects of globalisation.

Some constituencies are scrupulous about letting applicants know in good time whether they've got through or not, showing that this small courtesy is not beyond the ability of a well-organised constituency. For instance, at an equally busy selection, Devizes let the Disappointed know several days before the short-list appeared on CH. Suffolk West hasn't let me know whether my application got through yet. I think it's bad manners to let CH readers know before they tell me.

Good for you, Maria. It'll be hard work but good for you for stepping up to the plate. The best of luck, James.