Disillusion rather than resentment was behind much of the voting for the British National Party (BNP) in this month’s European elections. Unlike past campaigns, in which race and immigration have been the issues for the far-right parties (across most of Europe, they still are), this year’s elections saw the party trying to win votes on its ‘outsider’ status.

The BNP has been trying to move away from its overtly racist image for the last few years, and its attempts to do so have been given a huge boost by the venal behaviour of many mainstream MPs. The expenses scandal and its corrosive effect on public trust of our politicians will undoubtedly be a key component of the BNP’s electoral strategy, as it attempts to get off first base in the European Parliament and win up to six seats.

This is just the latest and most obvious way in which conventional political parties have aided and abetted the rise of the far-right. In my opinion, disgust with the political establishment, and a loss of faith in the ability of parties to listen to local concerns, is more responsible for the steady rise of the BNP than any rise in racist sentiment amongst the British people.

And it certainly has been a steady rise. Although support for far-right parties such as the BNP is still smaller in the UK than in other parts of Europe, it is increasing. In our study of voting patterns for the far-right parties, the Institute of Community Cohesion found that in the 2008 local elections, one in 30 UK voters chose the BNP, making it the fourth largest national party. In the 2008 local elections (see graphic, above) each Labour candidate attracted an average of around 500 votes, while each BNP candidate attracted almost 400; while this may not be a fair comparison – after all, Labour put up far more candidates – it is an interesting one all the same. A more proportional voting system might have seen the far right party win 140 council seats.

At the heart of this growth in support for the BNP appears to be a rise in dissatisfaction among some groups of voters with the increasingly metropolitan political establishment – in particular, a sense of having been ‘let down’ by Labour and ignored by David Cameron’s Conservatives – plus fears of globalisation, and the longstanding Euro-scepticism of some sections of English society. The BNP no longer appeals so nakedly to race and ethnicity as a factor in winning support. Instead, it takes any genuine unease or disgruntlement and turns it into votes.

It is the un-emptied bin, the un-cleaned graffiti and the abandoned vehicle that provide fodder for local BNP campaigners. The fact is that the BNP has gone through something of a reinvention in recent years; and despite internal disputes and factionalism, the party has seen ongoing growth in support. Fundamental to this make-over has been a focus on grassroots activities, with the BNP becoming increasingly active at neighbourhood level, contesting local elections on a wide range of ‘bread and butter’ issues. The party’s activists are often highly visible at a local level, offering themselves as the solution to poor local environments or antisocial behaviour. In this respect, Hazel Blears was absolutely right when she said new media is “no substitute for knocking on doors or setting up a stall in the town centre”.

With the growth of the party has come a rise in the number of people willing to associate politically with the BNP and stand on the party’s ticket. Importantly, the profile of both candidates and supporters has altered significantly in recent years: the stereotypical image of BNP supporters and promoters as hoodlums is no longer readily applicable. Many BNP voters are not racists when they first come into contact with the party, and their first engagement with the party may not be over race or even immigration issues. The relationship may move on to that – but we need to be careful that when we condemn the party, we do not automatically condemn their voters.

The party itself, however, has not moved beyond its xenophobic past. The BNP’s message of racial intolerance remains, dominated by immigration and general anti-foreigner and anti-Muslim vitriol – although there has perhaps been a subtle change in emphasis from issues of colour to those of culture. Indeed, the recent attempt in one BNP leaflet to deny that many minority communities could ever become British shows how little the party has really changed. The same leaflet revealed that the party’s ultimate aim is the “lawful, humane and voluntary repatriation of the resident foreigners of the UK”.

The danger is that unless real issues at grassroots level are addressed, the BNP will be able to put its racist spin on local situations. If there is not enough housing in an area, the streets are not clean or the schools are under-performing, it is easy for some to blame the ‘foreigners’. The greatest threat this week is that by winning a seat in Europe the BNP will gain access to public funds and a stronger platform, enabling it to build its infrastructure and support.

The ongoing rise of the BNP severely affects community cohesion; the party exploits a lack of integration for its own ends. Increasing extremist literature and the growing prominence of activists creates anxiety and anger in many vulnerable communities. And all public authorities have an important role in responding to this issue: at the very least, they need to anticipate unease and correct misinformation. Left alone, the BNP will unsettle people and disrupt lives. Propoganda should not be allowed to change the attitudes of ethnic minorities to a country which will continue to respect and support them.

While we must challenge the BNP’s overt racism and any incitement to hatred, the best way to beat the party is to alleviate the circumstances in which they thrive, removing their easy targets by improving service providers’ engagement with local populations. And this is a lesson for policymakers as much as political parties. Do we really know what people are feeling? Has the box-ticking process of the perception survey taken over from actual engagement with individuals and groups? Areas of poverty and poor educational attainment are strong predictors of BNP success. Reducing inequality and ensuring decent education will be far more effective than just condemning them as extremists.

Britain is overwhelmingly a tolerant country, made rich by its diversity – and the BNP poses a real threat to that. But taking the moral high ground and condemning the party’s racism has been ineffective in beating it back. To make a real impact, government at national and local levels needs to alleviate the disillusion and alienation which the racists exploit.