When Hope not Hate talk about 'open and honest debate', they do so in poor faith

Hope not Hate's self-justifying article 'The 2015 UKIP threat' states in its midst:

"There is nothing wrong about talking about immigration or even expressing concern about the rate of change or immigration policy – in fact HOPE not hate has always argued that we need a much more honest and open discussion about the subject. But it is the manner of this debate that is so important."

Which leads us to wonder why later in the same article they bring up the subject of the repatriation of

immigrants. Still on he Hope not Hate website is an article copied from the Observer newspaper during the Newark by-election focussing on UKIP candidate Roger Helmer. Inspired by Hope not Hate research, the Observer attacked Helmer for comments in his book 'A Declaration of Independence', stating

"Voluntary repatriation, in which legal immigrants are given financial assistance to leave the UK, was supported at the last election only by the BNP. The last time the policy was accepted by a mainstream party was in 1970, when it was a cause of the Tory MP Enoch Powell and featured in his party's manifesto."

As we wrote at the time, voluntary repatriation of immigrants who wished to return to their country of origin was first included in Section 29 of the Immigration Act 1971, and the scheme was expanded by the Blair government in the Nationality, Immigration & Asylum Act 2002. It remains in force.

The Observer - following a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission - had the grace to apologise for the error, print a correction and withdraw the article from their website. Visitors to Hope not Hate's pages who follow the link in their article will find that it leads to a 'dead' page on the Observer.

Hope not Hate - who monitor the media both personally and via their US based consultants - can hardly fail to have missed the Observer's correction, or that voluntary repatriation was introduced by the Conservative government in 1971 and expanded hugely by the Blair government in 2002. Have they withdrawn their own version of the article, which is however you look at it simply untrue? No. So when they say

"HOPE not hate has always argued that we need a much more honest and open discussion about the subject"

Remember that what they mean by 'honest and open' is continuing to publish something which is not just spin or a matter of interpretation, but what in the old days was considered a straight lie. An untruth. A falsehood. And no 'open and honest' debate can start with such a blatant display of poor faith.

Lies, damn lies and Labour

The three 'non-political' members of the public who just
happen to have close links to the Labour Party

Hope not Hate have been busy circulating the Manchester Evening News story from yesterday in which three innocent, non-political members of the public were used in a UKIP leaflet. As was revealed on another blog late last night, these three innocents - Bernard Caine, Irene Lawrence and her daughter Rachel - are in fact Labour Party activists. UKIP has confirmed that all three gave their permission for their image to be used, while sources tell us that pretty much everybody involved with the story also knew that it was fundamentally a lie, although that did not stop the Manchester Evening News running it.

Bernard Caine, the gentleman pictured, said he "has no party political affiliation but on this occasion has picked Labour candidate Mike Kane via

The 'non-political' Mr Caine not at all urging people to
vote Labour on his friend Mike Kane's behalf

postal vote, added: “It is diabolical.”". His choice of Mike Kane was not entirely unexpected, as he was a fellow director of the multi-million pound Parkway Green Housing Trust a few years ago, a position to which he was nominated by the local Labour Party. He was also pictured with Mike Kane and Harriet Harman - a photograph which appears on the latter's website - at the beginning of the Wythenshawe & Sale East by-election attending a Labour Party meeting. He also appears to have forgotten his presence amongst a carefully selected audience of Labour supporters who got to meet Ed Milliband during the campaign.

The non-political Bernard Caine not listening to
Labour leader Ed Milliband

Irene Lawrence - who "only went to the meeting because her housing association asked her to go" - has a similarly short memory. She was the chairwoman of the multi-million pound Willow Park Housing Trust for 11 years and also worked closely with Mike Kane and the Labour administration who nominated her.

And for Ms Lawrence's daughter Rachel? Well, she also appears to have got to meet Ed Milliband as one of the carefully pre-selected audience members when the Labour leader 'meets the public, although as it is difficult to be certain, we have not reproduced the photograph here. 

It is worth asking whether with former directors of two of the largest local housing trusts in Wythenshawe being prepared to lie about their association with the Labour Party if this is the source of local resident's complaints that they were told to take down UKIP posters and placards from their social housing? Were Labour tacitly supporting threats to the security of working class people in housing association properties?

UKIP will face many more of these set-ups over the coming months. We should not underestimate the depths to which the Labour Party will sink, or the lies which will be told by otherwise ordinary people. It is no wonder that Hope not Hate are pushing the story so hard. Increasingly though HnH are finding that even their supporters are seeing through their lies: