Got my MPs attention

[Seeker]

I have been emailing my MP for 2 or 3 years about the lack of ethics and the level of corruption in the Conservative Party.
He responded last night which surprised me because he'd previously told me that he deleted my emails before reading them.
He said that what I writing was potentially libellous - something I'd not considered since I didn't think he was reading them anyway and I was simply writing through catharsis.

I haven't written to him about this one (yet): Lebedev's peerage. A national security risk (said the intelligence services) that Boris overruled to grant a peerage.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnsons-russian-crony-evgeny-lebedev-got-peerage-after-spies-dropped-warning-3dp6sw29x

Everything I have sent him came from the public domain and has not been contested within that domain which means proving libel/defamation is near impossible. I think he was having a bad day.

My last email, the one he was referencing, complained about corruption (of course) and how it related to the slowness of implementing sanctions on Russian oligarchs.

If you remember, during the last election, there was an investigation into Russian influence into that election (and, indeed, Brexit). The results were published (9 months late) and said; yes there was evidence and... nothing. They (the intelligence services) were not tasked to go any further than answer that simple question and Boris refused any further investigations. This from a party that has taken £millions from Russian donors, often with close Kremlin links. It stinks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_British_politics

Anyway, if I'm wrong and get jailed, I'd like a carrot cake with a file in it, please. :)

[embee]

You got it! :smt038

[garynortheast]

Sounds like a bit of bluster and bullsh1t from your MP seeker.

But then he is a tory, and they have a bit of a track record.

[Craig380]

Libellous against who? Him personally? Or the Conservative Party? Good luck to him trying to sue you for libel if it's the latter.

Give him the old Arkell vs. Pressdram.

[yokohama]

Sounds like he's dim enough to qualify as a Tory MP. Surely your comments are only libellous if you put them out into the public domain? Via social media, the internet or print for example? If they are part of a private correspondence between the two of you, I don't think that can be considered as libel.

[Ruffy]

...
He said that what I writing was potentially libellous - something I'd not considered since I didn't think he was reading them anyway and I was simply writing through catharsis.

...

Everything I have sent him came from the public domain and has not been contested within that domain which means proving libel/defamation is near impossible. I think he was having a bad day.

...
The trick to avoid such accusations is to always write in a way that only shows that you are offering an opinion, not alleging an absolute fact. Plentiful usage of "I think", "it seems", "it looks like" etc.

Did he actually attempt to address your concerns to any extent or was he just trying to warn you off?

However, does that present an opportunity for you? You should write back and thank him for his cautionary advice. State something along the lines of of course you have never intended to make false statements (which they would have to be to be libellous), that you were simply expressing grave concerns about the apparent conduct of many in public office (based on publicly available information, as you have said) and that you would be more than pleased to learn that what you seem to have to inevitably conclude was in fact wrong, so you would appreciate his help to ensure comprehensive investigation to establish unequivocal facts. However, since the issues are so significant, you do not think a simple counter opinion is appropriate and more substantial investigation is essential, to be carried out without delay. Etc., etc.!

He's given you an 'in' if you want to take it. I'm sure you're not put off by the threat (yes, threat, even though it's no doubt put in a polite, friendly and advisory way).

At the risk of teaching you to 'suck eggs', there's a big difference between complaining about something you don't like and accusing/proving someone of having done wrong. To use your example, taking money from Russian donors is not wrong in itself - it doesn't necessarily stink: the wrong only comes if it's definitely linked to a promise of something in return that is not allowed.