Any member may write a post by emailing it to the society at labour@guild.bham.ac.uk
BULS adheres to policy set by the Guild of Students and aims to create a free and open space for debate to progress safely. Whilst adhering to these principles the committee will also keep in mind the contributors rights to free speech and expression. BULS will take any offensive comments made very seriously and will not tolerate its readers and contributors being abused.
**Complaints Procedure**
Any complaints regarding the content of BULS blog must be made to labour@guild.bham.ac.uk
The website of Birmingham University Labour Students (BULS) is controlled by the committee elected by its members at its Annual General Meeting. The committee will investigate any complaints made and deal with them in confidence. Any decisions made following complaints will be made collectively by the signatories of the committee (usually the Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary and Treasurer). To help avoid such complaints the committee will publish a guide to blogging for all members.
If readers are unsatisfied by the decision made by the committee following a complaint then they must contact the Guild of Students directly.
BULS aims to deal with all email-enquiries within 2-3 working days.
Birmingham University Labour Students 
Hi…
I’m a drama student here at the university, currently researching attitudes toward “Terror” in Britain. I was wondering whether it would be possible to have a face-to-face Q and A session with one of your committee about their personal views on terrorism, violence in society, and also terrorism for ‘a labour point of view’. It would be very informal, anonymous if you want it to be, and I wouldn’t be looking to put any kind of bias for or against your society. Do you think I could steal some of your time? Thankyou for reading this long-winded word-vomit anyway…Nix
Thanks Nix, sounds interesting: email me at tom_guise@hotmail.com and we can discuss further
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am interested in fundraising for BULS’s through the Workers Beer Company (WBC). This is an organisation that BULS is already affiliated with. The fundraising mechanism is simple: organisations like trades BULS send volunteers to pour and serve drinks in WBC bars and beer tents. The Workers Beer Company then donates £6.50 to the parent organisation for every hour that their volunteers contribute. It’s a fun way for activists to make money for their organisation.
I understand that this may be an unusual request but I would be very appreciative if someone could get back to me on whether BULS would be interested.
Kind Regards,
Bryn Stott
Hi Bryn,
I’m afraid we’ve filled our allocation for this summer with WBC. Sorry to dissapoint.
Tom
Firstly, let me make myself clear. I am not one for silencing the BNP. While I agree with the sentiments of the Anti-Nazi League, I cannot endorse many of their methods or more extreme forms of protest. People should have the right to protest outside the meetings of any political party or public organisation that they do not agree with but I have no time for any form of violence or intimidation regardless of the end to which they are employed. To misquote the great French philosopher Voltaire “I may not agree with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it.”
The problem with the invitation for the leader of the British National Party, Nick Griffin to appear on Question Time, is that it is totally disproportionate to the influence held by this political party.
If we take the results of the last General Election into account, the BNP gained less than 200,000 votes. Less than 0.5% of all votes cast. At the European Election in the summer of this year, they gained two seats and according to the BBC, 6.2% of votes. This may seem huge but these figures do not include Northern Ireland. With the two republican parties in Northern Ireland registering 200,000 votes, when added to the Unionist vote of another 200,000, this significantly reduces this figure. In 2004, the BNP registered 4.9%, again ignoring Northern Ireland. Thus their vote percentage rose 1.3%. This hardly represents a major bump, especially considering that there were 2 million fewer votes cast in 2009 than in 2004, thus more than 10% fewer votes, with Labour in particular suffering from voter apathy and disaffection. Thus, with all this in mind, we can see that a major shift in attitudes to the BNP is far from proven. A smaller percentage of votes than the Green Party not to mention, UKIP, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservative Party. Yet where on Question Time is Caroline Lucas, Leader of the Green Party? She appeared once before the European elections, however, there are no plans for her to return. Her previous appearance prior to that was in 2005. The Green Party gained more votes than the BNP at a national level, in 2005, and at a european level in 2004 as well as this year as I have stated. Alongside that, the BNP have no MPs at Westminster, unlike Respect, the SNP, Plaid Cymru,the DUP,the SDLP, the UUCP and Plaid Cymru.
Let me make this clear, I have no problem with members of smaller parties being invited onto Question Time, especially when those minor parties command a fair degree of popular support e.g. UKIP who despite having no MPs at Westminster command respectable figures at elections, with 15% support this year. Members of minor parties often make valid points which the representatives of the larger parties often do not. Though I do not agree with their central policy position, Nigel Farage of UKIP, is an eloquent and sharp member of the political establishment and his insights are often incisive and accurate. By the same token, other members of the political elite are given rather more credence and publicity than they merit, for example George Galloway (who ridiculously described Saddam Hussein as a “brave” man.) I am merely arguing that the BNP, by being invited onto Question Time, are being credited with more political influence than they actually possess, which I feel is dangerous.
Now that the BNP have been invited onto the show, it cannot be rescinded as this would give the party a martyr-complex. I do, however, think that there is no basis for inviting this party in the first place.
The only possible explanation, and one that I hope has no foundation in truth, is that this is a cynical ploy to improve ratings by talking up what remains an extremely small and insignificant little party that is, purely because of its ideology, given the air of publicity.
It is thus irresponsible and wholly inappropriate of the BBC to have issued this invitation to Nick Griffin.