" 
 :::::They word it carefully because they need to avoid prosecution, of course, but to extract the key phrases: ""we simply recognise that...  human populations which have undergone.... evolutionary changes.... have developed differences in... behavioural tendencies.."" (I accept that is being very selective, but the sense is there.) That seems to me to be an explicit statement. I'm never happy about including large chunks of text in footnotes - it always seems rather untidy, and I would personally prefer to simply direct readers to the original (it's on p17 by the way), but let's try it. I don't think the 2007 manifeston does override the 2005 for these purposes; the latter was for a national General Election. 
 :::::I'm also repositioning the 'denied by the BNP'in the infobox to appear AFTER the references. This is for clarity, as none of the references are there in connection with any denial. It is still my view that this should not be in the infobox anyway, since it is covered in the article. 
 :::::I will also remove WhiteTiger86's addition. This is unnecessary, being too long and the issue of membership is already mentioned in the introduction anyway. Note that this addition also removed the sentence we have been discussing!   "