Is there any contravention of existing legislation this man considers to be a step too far?
Only thinking of the children: Ed Balls considers a ban on BNP teachers.
"A source close to the schools secretary, Ed Balls, said there had been several meetings on the issue with teaching unions which are lobbying for a change in teachers' contracts to prevent them from working if they are members of far-right groups including the BNP. The issue was being "actively looked at", the source said...
"...The source close to Balls said the issue was being re-examined in the light of the election to the European parliament of two BNP members, including party leader Nick Griffin, who has been convicted of inciting racial hatred."
Do I like the idea of a BNP member teaching my child? No, I don't. But my personal opinions - and those of all teachers who operate within the law - are largely irrelevant.
The real question here is:
Is it correct for a government to decide that a member of a legally recognised political party (who adheres to relevant legislation including that which protects children from the political and/or religious beliefs of their teachers) should be banned from teaching?
NO.
Do not be fooled into thinking that because the majority of people disagree with BNP policy that this is a valid moral crusade. If a law-abiding member of a legally recognised political party can be banned from teaching, then any member of a legally recognised political party/religion/philosophy can be banned from teaching, as per the "moral" compass of Ed Balls.
This agenda of favouring disproportionate and arbitrary action, just in case, is starting to become horribly familiar.
[UPDATE: synchronicity - just seen in Google Reader that Longrider takes up the subject of the BNP here, most eloquently.]
