◆ SpookStack

Fen LAE STL SN RENE TOE PEA em EON AN . 161), ETHE Prime MINistER) 4-. 536+ yi gor of dealing in military operations, as 1 think the right hon. Gentleman had, with mining and counter-mining. You i.) do the best you can so that the other fellow shall no; hear of sec what you are Former doing, and he does the same, That isthe : closest parallel to espionage and countes- espionage, and in both exercises silence is the essence of success, I still Jook for- ward. though without much confidence, to a debate in the Soviet Pastisment on the defection of Mr. Petrov. - The truth is that there are one or two Ministers who are responsible and who can judge the current record of the Security Service on the basis of facts aad figures; but, -in the nature of things, we cannot disclose all that Too many people would like to know, but there is one test which can be applied, and 1 think the House would perhaps like to have it applied. 31 was touched on gently earlier in the debate—what they achieved in the war. . ~ Curiously ‘enough this record can be quite accurately assessed and measured, because, of course, it can be checked against the German records captured at the end of the war. Unfortunately, we cannot do that in the other case. It may be discussed because Ht is a closed chapter. ¥ can say io general terms that, as checked against Ger- man intelligence, the right hon. Gentle- man is perfectly correct. The countgr- espionage achievement of our Security Service during the was was quite oui- standing. ey odes gee I want to give a practical iMustration of this which may interest the House. The Normandy. landing in 1944, ia which some hon, Members probably took part, achieved » complete tactical surprise. We know that not only because of what hap- pened at the time but from the German ¢ records which now make it quite clear. - That could never have happened if our Socurity Service bere had not achieved - such outstanding success in purging away enemy spies from the home base from which it was launched. Hon. Members, koow—hon. Gentlemen have referred to it—how orany people, how many soldiers, pew ; yet the base was s0 purified that in fact nothing at all was gained by thi enemy. a. ony feat ‘That is perhaps the greatest tribute to the Security Service that there has been, wane np. oe tt $... Office. I NOVEMBER 1955 Officials: AT Now cal Mr Ww, xan. isappearance $612, pwede tcobo aaa alaantald Vines einai and it deserves credit for it. Mt is a se-"~" markable record. -1 do not know—I cay not go Into our record sgainst Communist spies since the war, but I think on whole that the result will compate not vafavourably. _,*, - , ZANE SAY rt Now I come to the ques ion of an is: quit into the Security Service. I do not ink that there is need for such an ine wiry. but I will make a suggestion, I ould like to say why J do not think it is Teally necessary. Following the Fuchs case, and in part as a result of the crit cism of our security organisation, an official inquiry was made in 1950—that was not fefersed to by my right hon. Friend—when the Socialist Government were in office. It was a secret inquiry. Its feport was secret, but I think I cao tell the House that the conclusion of the re- por was that the Security Service was found to be well equipped, well organised. and capable of adapting itself to its ad- mitledly quite different tasks, as several hon. Members have said. 1 have no doubt that that is true and that we cao have confidence in the Security Service, «. As fhe Foreign Secretary explained earlier this afternoon, for maay genera- tions past. perhaps for centuries past, it has happily been unnecessary to question, the loyalty of men and women in the pub- lic service. Perhaps—and I admit this to the hon. Member for Coventry, East; 4 think perhaps there is something in this— that induced a certain tendency to fed thal it cannot happen here. That, I think, may well be true. Perhaps we were a little faggard to realise the. danger for that reason, but there is no doubi at all, and I really can assure the House of this, that apy such comfortable illusion was finally shattered 4 OY the., disappearance of Maclean, Te te oth ie et ee No time was wasted once the extent of the threat was understood. There has been a progressive tightening of security measures throughout the public service. The Foreign Secretary has described the itive vetting, and J do not want to 30 into that any further, excépt to say that T think those proposals £0 as far aod are as stringent as this House would be willing to approve without encroaching oa those principles which hitherto Parfia- ment has most jealously guarded, and, I think, rightly guarded. : Let me conclude with this observation. This debate bas shown that this is not 6 ’