NEVER mind attacking the British National Party, what about defending our traditional right to freedom of speech?

Although I dislike many things about the BNP, I find it even more objectionable to attempt to ban their activities and pretend they have no right to exist.

Let me make it plain. I won't be going anywhere near the BNP rally to be staged in Stoke-on-Trent a week tomorrow. It's no place even for an old reactionary like me.

All the same, I am concerned that the responsible senior citizens of the North Staffordshire Pensioners' Convention should back a call for the event to be forbidden.

One would have thought that pensioners were mature enough to appreciate the anti-democratic nature of trying to stifle those who have a different point of view from your own.

Some of them may well be familiar with the famous quotation attributed to the philosopher Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire might have been a Frenchman, but this principle was adopted by generations of British politicians of all parties. It has been a pillar of democracy and kept dictators at bay.

So we used to say what we thought without any worries. Sadly, this has been eroded in an age of political correctness. Now people fear prosecution if they don't obey the PC rules.

We got a whiff of this totalitarian attitude some years ago when the former Labour MP George Stevenson called for a ban on the BNP's election posters.

At that time they hadn't even got a toe-hold on the city council. Now they have nine councillors. Perhaps Mr Stevenson could see it coming.

The truth, I feel, is that the Labour Party in Stoke-on-Trent used to be too fond of silencing any kind of opposition, even when it occurred within its own ranks.

Freedom of speech was fine, so long as it didn't go against the party line.

It was also restricted to a chosen few. The rest had to keep their thoughts to themselves, or risk getting the chop.

So all in all, Stoke-on-Trent has a dismal record when it comes to tolerating a different political standpoint. This has been helped in the past by Labour's overwhelming support.

In my view, the BNP has made spectacular progress, mostly through protest votes against Labour, not because Potteries people have embraced the BNP's policies on immigration, although that's undeniably on their list of worries.

People on both sides of the argument get worked up and angry over this highly emotive issue. The BNP's pet theme stirs primitive feelings in most of us, both for and against.

Indeed, the rise of the BNP in the Potteries has echoes of the arrival of Oswald Mosley's Blackshirts in the 1930s.

As things stand, we don't know where next week's rally is going to be held. That could be a blessing in disguise. A possible confrontation between hundreds of BNP supporters and opposing groups is not a happy prospect.

Party leader Nick Griffin is said to be bringing his own security team, which sounds ominous. The BNP has gained a reputation for brawn.

The focus of the rally will be on the court case in which Habib Khan, from Normacot, was convicted of the manslaughter of his neighbour Keith Brown, a BNP supporter.

I agree with Mike Wolfe that the eight-year sentence passed on Habib Khan was a reasonable term. But the BNP is treating it as an example of discrimination in the defendant's favour.

To my mind, this affair cannot justify a national rally on the lines proposed. It is an inflammatory move which shows the BNP in its worst possible light. It certainly won't be a good thing for Stoke-on-Trent's image in the rest of the country.

But I believe that banning this event would be an unacceptable course of action. Besides denying freedom of speech, it would be a moral victory for the BNP.