Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 51


     
     1        tried to introduce this so-called common purpose within
              London Greenpeace for a start, which I will come on to in
     2        a minute, but also by implication that somehow we have
              agents and servants all over the world who we phone up and
     3        say:  "Give out some leaflet or print out our leaflet but
              with your own address on it" or something.  People are all
     4        voluntary independent agents.  It is up to them what they
              do; they take responsibility for it.
     5
              The purpose of the campaign is education for the public
     6        and improvements in society.  London Greenpeace itself
              which has been disparaged by Mr. Rampton in pretrial
     7        hearings and also in the trial, no doubt it will come up,
              is the original Greenpeace in the country founded in 1971,
     8        and mainly at that time against nuclear power and nuclear
              testing and broadened out into all areas of environmental
     9        concern.
 
    10        It is not a centralised or formal group; the plaintiffs
              are aware of that.  It is a loose collective.  Decisions
    11        are made by consensus and they are not binding on
              individuals.  There may be all kinds of differences of
    12        opinion within that.  Basically.  Mr. Rampton and
              McDonald's have to prove that Helen and I handed out that
    13        fact sheet in the material time which is the winter of
              1989/1990, if they are going to prove publication.  That
    14        will, no doubt, come up in the evidence, the details of
              that.
    15
              London Greenpeace was described by Mr. Rampton, despite
    16        him reading out the leaflet, although on principle it was
              quite illuminating, but he described them as a group that
    17        sought to disorganise society, or something like that,
              which of course is an age old myth against people that may
    18        have sympathy with anarchism is they do not believe in
              organisation.  In fact, the opposite is true.  They
    19        believe in a society organised by people themselves rather
              than organised for them by governments and
    20        multi-nationals.  That is really the difference in
              McDonald's Corporation and in this case, the London
    21        Greenpeace, and other critics, which is that they want to
              see a differently organised society, a decentralised one
    22        and co-operatively run without exploitation and
              oppression.  If he wants to label that anarchism, so be
    23        it.
 
    24        Speaking personally, as I have already indicated, at the
              material time of the alleged libel I was virtually
    25        house-bound most of that time.  I did manage to get out a
              few times and do a few bits and pieces, but I was in no 
    26        way a core member of London Greenpeace, let alone the 
              anti-McDonald's campaign, which that will come up in 
    27        evidence no doubt.
 
    28        I feel a bit under pressure here to finish off as quickly
              as possible.  I have not that much more to do.  My
    29        personal background is that I have been concerned about
              the environment all my life, but I was specifically very
    30        concerned about the workers' rights side of this whole
              case because of my activities as a Trade Union branch

Prev Next Index