◆ SpookStack

| | ‘4 * + _. Mr. Crossman : No, 1609 Former Farilgn Office» Fuchs had been treated. But it was hoped by using this method, to get enough evidence against Maclean to treat him specifically as Fuchs was treated, and that the intention was exactly the same in the Maclean case as in the Fuchs case, 1 think that is sight, and T think that is necessary, but what the bon. Gentleman ett & SCE ft nts. “Mr. Crossman: Surely, the trouble is that Fuchs was aot “tipped off,” whereas in the case of Macican, if we understand aright, the denial of secret rs to. Maclean gave him warning?. The Prime Minister: ¥- wonder.. 1 know the hoa. Gentleman. said that 1 am afraid that I am not familiar with all the details of what secret papers were mopped and what were allowed to go through. It could have tipped him off, but I imagine that it was very inteltigeatly gone. 1 would rather doubt —thoug! I do not know—whether that was what tipped him off. 1 was rather puzzled when the bon. Gentleman went on to ask why the Government at that time did Bot warn the ports and withdraw, the, PasspOrte, moe eg cact actif 7 id not ‘say that The Prime Minister Well, somebody cise did, That, most certainly, would have alerted him compleiely. ‘It would have been a most fatal step 1o take, because if we bad alerted the ports all round the country—and they ‘are very certainly have got back in due course to, Maclean. Personally, if 1 may put my view, 1 think the Government were right Dot to warn the ports and not to withdraw the passports, but were right to try to treat him as they weated the Fuchs case. Lam sorry that, though it worked in the Fuchs case, it did not work in this one.” % “eee ie fhe dee ee te <1 should Jike to’ say“one’ final’ word about the question of the present arrange- meats in respect of the Foreiga Office. 1 say this deliberately, after having spent, I an assure the House, very much more time on this topic i would have wished over the last year, 1 am con. inced," as Prime Minister, that, Forciga Office is now following a corr and careful security procedure, and tha’ Te PROVEMBER ISS Opcich~Thorpedrante yey °° either in this or any other country. That Z0-"' does not guarantee us against future 3: Gisasters, but % does give the strongest assurance that ¥ can give to the House, with all the responsibilities that: rest oa; me, that we have done sl} that\we can do within the Jaw. - eae wrinot Now, I want to connect ‘with that the’ Security Service and sa: something about it, My right hon. Friend spoke of the creditable piece of detection by which the” rity Service got on the trail of a spyo f Unfortunately, 1 cannot explain in detail how" the Security Service followed, Maclean's activities and eventually ‘de. tected them, Y edmit—and one has 19. say this to the House—that this is some thing that has been concealed from the! louse and must continue to be concealed? . for good reasons. I cannot and 1 shall’ Rot reveal the methods and sources op, which our Security Service relies, “but. there is one thing that T can say might help the House about this.’ te The Foreign Secretary mentioned the. . initial information on which the Security: Service was working in 1949. 1 think is quite true that the right hon. Gentle’ man was not informed until the 5; of 1951, the reason for that, as I undere. stand it, being that even then--and I have: - to be careful how I express this—the shred. of evidence was pretty thin when they: informed him. Before then, it was of very: little, value. However that may be, my * sight hon. Friend referred to the fact that: during that period after 1949, over a fon, period, a ficld of investigation was open and patience with which it was It also indicates the continuing informa Won oa which it rested. . More than that J am not prepared to éay. son ad ae “In this ‘case, as in, every other’cast’a counter-espionage, it is, of course, essen, tia} not to Jet the others know what you know. ‘As one hon. Gentleman eahay : said, we must not ‘Jet them know all we’ know Jest that might guide them to know, sine. how we know it, That was the Problemy: sie which there has been throughout ‘this’ “ - case. ‘I cannot say any more about that; . than that this consideration played a bons tisuing part throughout all the years wheq: - we have been dealing with this case. “ Some hon. Members of this House may” ale SO 2 ae a ST RTO ks standards ‘are have had the experience which J once had ie vow Oe Fag Hae RK % gM Meee ae, ao RE Rae Pata ‘