◆ SpookStack

ee es pede eee ~ oi iw 1567 Former Foreign Office ~_IMR. Nicnorson.]. *. aaa Foreign Service’ will have to accept a further diminution of their rights.” > 4 was struck by the fact that the Foreign Secretary seemed to think that there was very little intermediate stage between retaining a man in the Foreign Office and prosecuting him. 1 believe that more use should be made of transfer to other branches of the Civil Service, There are two criteria. The first is seliability, and the second is vulnerability. am_ not talking about Nitical reliability, but about reliability of character, «ee te gee * In the course of our lives we meet maay people—we are probably very oftea of that type oursclves—who are very well- meaning, but are not of the strongest character, and because of that they are ‘ound to be weak links in any chain. They may be indiscreet; they may con- tract unfortunate marriages, and they may mix in questionable circles in foreign capitals. I believe that members of the Foreign Service, because they have a posi- tion which is highly responsible and exceedingly honourable, must be prepared to accept to a greater extent than they do at present transfer to other branches of the Civil Service if their characters arc thought to be weak... “ So far as vulnerability ‘fs concerned, there have been references to the unfor- tunate habits of Burgess gnd various people. Without delivering ‘moral judg- ment, we must face the fact that people, who are perverted in their tastes are ex- tremely vulnerable to blackmail. I did not know Burgess well. I met him once ~or twice.” At one time, he was the B.B.C. fepresentative who arranged the speakers for “The Week in Westminster.” One had only to look at his eyes to see that he was an unreliable and shifty type, brilliant though he was. I believe that € in those days there had been the same careful scrutioy of people's character; “habits and background ag there és today he would not have been in the Foreign _ Oiice for one week. suet greet A from that trend in the debate, which I deplore, there has also been the undertone, voiced by the hon. Member for Hammersmith, North (Mr. Tomney), of general anxiety so far as our Security Services are concerned. This debate may indeed have done good if it calls the atten- tion of the Government and of public upg Opinion’ to the’ grave uneasiness which «! felt_by peopte who “know their stuf about the way in which we are dealing with the Communist menace in this coun- uy. By “people who do know they stuff” I mean people like the bon. Mem. ‘bes for Hammersmith, North and Many of his friends,” Our Security Services are necessarily shrouded in secrecy, and no one demands an open inquiry to bring al their methods to light +. Bie ead 3 "This debate will have doné good if & shows the Government that there is keen anxiety. It will have done harm ¥, to public opinion throughou, the world, % reflects serious anxiety over the Foreiga Service. I start where ¥ began: do not make any mistake about it, we have the finest Foreign Service in the world.. It is democratic, varied, efficient and the envy and object of respect of every other 7.30 p.m: epee Cai aaa Mr, A. J, Irvine (Liverpool, Edge Hill): I did not have the advantage hearing the early stages of this debate, but I am tempted to intervene by certain observa: tions which I heard’ in the speeches latterly delivered. I listened with great in- terest to the observations of my hon,’ Friend the Member for Stirling and Fal- kirk Burghs (Mr. Matcoim MacPherson), ~ and with a great deal that he said { agree. But 1 found difficulty ia finding * the connection between what my boa,” Friend bad to say and the particular issue © of security with which, I understand, the © House is concerned in this debate... +c. a _” It may well be that the Foreign Office ¥ suffers from not having as wid ly repre- j: sentative ap establishment as one would wish, but I should have thought that it © would be a difficult case to argue that © one consequence of that was that its posi- :- tion in terms of security was, by that circumstance, in any ay endangered diminished. are ere ae ‘Mr. Malcolm MacPherson: I do not think there was any suggestion at any ri eeioae the debate wis concerned enti ith security. “Indeed, it secms to me that one of the advantages of a Gebate like this is that we can try 10 fook forward and deal with positive suggestions for reform rather than concentrate simply on the individual issue that causes the debate. On the question which my how Friend has raised about the connection