[Britain. law. The financial implicaDonations to Labour Movement…]

Scan page 11

Britain. law. The financial implicaDonations to Labour Movement Press Defence elite. him in pursuit of trade union Fund, c/o 214 Sickert Court, London N.1 2SY 425 6/R. (4 H. CH,0 E VP 501 20 11/3 («в (Vacz) (3ğy Vo1003456 ve 8 (2"+8)*z Vваx-36х (ч6711r)"(B'Veb7)! CHüVxP+86 THE libel case brought by Vanessa Redgrave of the WRP against Sean Matgamna and John Bloxam of Socialist Organiser now seems almost certain to come to court, despite the support from many in the labour movement for the appeal launched by Socialist Organiser - "A Labour Inquiry, Not the Courts"

At the time of an outcry by the Tories and the press against the WRP in February Sean Matgamna wrote the The response was a refusal. So the case continues, and the Labour Movement Press Defence Fund still needs to appeal for contributions.

Dear Gerry, I read in this morning's papers the comments of Ms Margaret Thatcher in the House of Commons on Youth Training. It reminds me that reality isn't just what it is but also, at a certain level, what it appears to be and what those who have power in our society can make it appear to be.

If reactionaries see the WRP and its activities as Trotskyism, that doesn't have much bearing on whether you are or are not Trotskyists. But it does nean that what is bein lackea in the form of th WRP is nevertheless being made to act as a stand-in for Trotskyism.

Your organisation and its activities make it easy for them to target and discredit Trotskyism, of course. Nevertheless I am now even less happy than i have been at the prospect of having to publicly rake over in court the entire history of your organisation over the last two decades.

ment shihd how move.

about that history and that papers like Socialist Organiser should have the right to freely comment on it without being gagged by fear of the courts (for which read leat of Ms Redgrave's money) is one thing. i consider it to be of great imporlance, ana the protection of free speech and the right of free comment in the labour (42) 600798424 Davy Jones movement is a matter of principle.

I consider it also to be a matter of principle that people claiming to be part of the labour movement should not use the bourgeois state against others in the labour movement. My views on your organisation (etc.) have not changed: preparing for the libel case has had the opposite effect on me, for it has refreshed my memory.

The current developments however put our dispute in a radically new context. So 1 pose the question again to you - in the present circumstances do you still think it advisable to proceed with a court action that can only help those who aim to discredit socialism and Trotskyism? By now you will have seen an outline of our basic case (and there is more) and an indication of some of the witnesses who will be called for us.

Whether or not there is to be a court case is entirely a matter for you to decide. I will have no alternative -despite Ms Thatcher etc. -but to defend myself in the only way open to me if you do proceed with the libel action. I will, of course, try to make it as difficult as possible for anyone to associate Trotskyism with the antics of your organisation: but that will be uphill work, I fear. Which is why I write you this letter.

I propose that representatives of your side and of ours - either legal representatives or better, representatives of the WRP and John Bloxam and myself meet to discuss the matter and see if anything can be done about the situation that is now shaping up. This would, of course, be entirely without prejudice and not in any way an admission by you that my defence is valid. My comments here are only an explanation of my motives for making this approach. I urge you to agree to this suggestion. If you think an informal discussion would be of any use please ring me.

I assume that you will inform Ms. V. Redgrave of this letter.

Yours etc.

Sean Matgamna /s)///.lN.1t

----- pull-quotes -----

folly of helP, backing up the appeal.