Extract from a teleprinter message from Kevin Rush for Seán Nunan
(Serial No. 3909)

The Anti-Partition of Ireland League

[matter omitted]

The quality of the membership is the League's greatest weakness. It has not attracted the better educated Irish citizen in this country and, for reasons mentioned later, it is doubtful whether it will ever do so. The present membership, particularly in the London area, contains an unduly high proportion of unstable characters, self seekers, and small time busybodies. Competent observers estimate that in the whole London area there are only about 20 or 30 active members who are really an asset to the League. In some of the provincial areas, the position is much better, but, in view of the conspicuous part which the London area councils play in the organisation the poor quality of their members and leadership - serving as it does to deter more serious minded people from associating themselves with the League - is most regrettable. The only consolation is that the central executive council, which seems to take a serious view of its responsibilities, appears to be alive to the problem.

[matter omitted]

Activities
It is difficult to gauge precisely how successful the League has been in its main task of informing British opinion of the facts of partition and keeping the problem of partition before British public opinion. This is all the more so because up to date the whole time staff has not worked efficiently as a team. The separation of the posts of organiser and secretary, and the inattention to duty of the occupant of the latter post, were particularly unfortunate in their results, the fruits of much of the organiser's work in the field being lost owing to the inability of the new branches which he managed to form to get prompt replies to their letters from the central secretariat. Close and effective co-operation between the organisation in the field and the central secretariat is an essential condition of the smooth working and the future expansion of the League.

In spite of the handicaps to which the League has been subject in this respect during the last twelve months, the progress made towards the achievement of its fundamental aims would seem to be by no means negligible. A considerable volume of publicity material about partition has been distributed: the publicity given to the League's social and other activities throughout the country has helped to keep the partition problem before the public mind in Britain: and the fact that 3,500 people have been rescued from the complete apathy and inaction about partition which normally characterises so many Irish people here, and enlisted as voluntary workers in the cause, is an important advance in itself.

The doubt is, however, whether the central executive committee have yet evolved a sufficiently clear-cut and inspiring plan of action for the local branches of the League. The League obviously cannot exist merely as an agency for distributing publicity material. If it tries to do so, the local branches finding nothing else to absorb their energies, will soon fall to quarrelling and disintegrate. General outlines of the work to be done have been sketched out by the central executive committee and are set forth on page 6 of the enclosed pamphlet entitled 'plan of organisation'. The weakness exists in the lack of sufficiently concrete and effective steps to translate these principles into positive, clear-cut programmes of action.

What the local branches needs, it seems to me, is not the definition of general objectives but detailed organisation on the ground. More important than vague periodical discussions about the injustices of partition would be an arrangement under which specific tasks would be assigned to the individual members of local branches - one to watch the local press, another to attend public meetings and ask questions, two or more others to join the local debating societies or the League of Labour Youth, two or three others to look after entertainments, etc. Careful planning of the work of the local branches in this way is essential if the vitality and effectiveness of the League is to be maintained. It will involve a good deal more constructive thinking by the central executive committee and a good deal more active organisational work in the areas.

Recommendations.

• It is of considerable importance, to my mind, that the Anti-Partition of Ireland League should remain in being and extend its activities. Any contraction or cessation of its activities at this stage would be a serious moral reverse for the campaign against partition in this country and would be attended with the danger - of which there are already definite signs - that the campaign against partition in this country would pass into the hands of other organisations likely to discredit it.
• A central whole time staff is essential to the successful working of the League. A staff consisting of the present secretary-organiser (who appears to be a reliable and efficient officer) and a well-educated female secretary-typist capable of dealing with correspondence and answering routine enquiries in the absence of the secretary-organiser, should be sufficient for this purpose.
• It is most desirable that the whole-time secretarial staff should be satisfactorily housed in the modest but decent offices in London.
• Everything possible should be done - short of undue interference in the internal affairs of the League - to induce the central executive council to work out, for the guidance of the branches, a detailed and carefully thought out plan of local activities, and to devote the maximum organisational effort towards carrying this plan into action.
• In evolving this plan, there should be the maximum degree of consultation with the local branches. The monthly return (of which a copy is attached)¹ should ask them to state not merely what they have already done, but also what they think that they themselves, and the League as a whole, might do which is not being done at present.
• On the basis of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Anti-Partition League might properly be given a further grant of £2,000 to cover the following expenses over the next twelve months:

Conclusion
It must be added, however, that even if the potentialities of the Anti-Partition of Ireland League are developed to their maximum, it can never succeed in exploiting to the full the important political asset we possess in the large numbers of our people in this country. The American League for an Undivided Ireland has not succeeded in doing this in the United States. It is doubly difficult for the Anti-Partition of Ireland League to do it in this country because whereas Irish people in the United States may be publicly associated with an anti-British activity with impunity - if not indeed with occasional advantage - anything suggestive of anti-Britishism has for obvious reasons a 'poor market' in this country. Doctors, business men, writers, actors, B.B.C. employers, and other Irish people in this country of professional and educational attainments are likely to continue to give the Anti-Partition of Ireland League a wide berth for this reason. And yet it is precisely these people whose interest and influence it is so important to enlist if we are to build up a general attitude of sympathy and understanding towards Ireland in this country.

Side by side with the Anti-Partition League, there is growing up a tendency for the Irish people in local areas in Britain to form Irish societies of a primarily cultural and social character. There is an excellent one in Portsmouth. There is another in Sheffield, and I hear reports of others in various other towns in Britain. To my mind we should devote every possible effort to the development of this movement. As I say, the type of society in question has primarily a cultural and social object. But the lack of an avowedly political object would not prevent the existence of specifically Irish societies of this type having an important practical and moral effect. Practically, they would help to keep the spirit of nationality alive among our people in Britain. Morally, they would serve as a reminder to local candidates of the size and importance of the Irish vote in this country. There is no reason why the development of a movement should impose any charge on Irish public funds, apart from the cost of such Irish publications as the Cultural Relations Committee may circulate to such societies from time to time.