◆ SpookStack

. s * viet . . a | a4 a a . ra + +: * a a. an - ee, 4 ger boos Pas oa -_o- et Yeu eat ee 2 pe te ee 77. Doman — aoe od r yf ‘ te , . : iy fhe roi te007 Roe ct Le ~ x. - seam Be > ‘ & - Fie ees _ ee “+ Ree a enw ed Pay - ad gt be af Bee * oe» i] yee g- ft hy .: - + a ‘4 ee ae a | i aro aera: procter ss are ot i ? wee BE oe MO “4. : = ow oS sof * 1 abe Smee ee ane ee ede eae A een ee eee ee 2 Brees epee tee : fmm ee ee Cae oo poo uernor a a - 2! i : 325. 3 4 = a ere a . - OW Lae aE LES Oe Ree atm we: 4 t + Ot: ee a + eee ripe Senge eee: - boa we = ee a . 7 - elm . ete eee Fa ee .- - a! . ” . ie Bad lee « 4 re . fee vas i? fee leap eet a . ’ & _ . od a 7? i we i ae siuet .. ne FD eo te ee Ol a . tO eh halal a tee stl de at RE Bnd tee Ne edi eee | ™ SE foo ee - ey EON oS meen tree . . . + . a ‘loa . © - ome _ 2 1583 + (Lieut Coroner Lipton je et. + or which might have created suspicion, After Burgess was recalled to London and was on -the way out, as has been made clear by preceeding speakers, he made a _telephone call to the United States and talked to some unknown person. That is known because he Jeft a friend of his to pay ihe bill of £7, te vache we roe: oh Here was a man in that very short period since his return to this country with & view to having some disciplinary action taken agains: him making a long telo-. hone call to the United States to some- body or other and apparently nobody was concerned about what he was doing of what his intentions were. **. Fok I will say for the British Security vices—and I agree with a great deal of what was said by the hon. and gallant Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Colonel Gomme-Duncan)—that within a few days of the disappearance the British Security Services bad all the facts of the ipo 3 er ee ee Pe Le eee ee Co hee 3 do not want to take up the time of the House, but Jet me now come to the situation that existed in the middle of April, 1951, when, according to the White Paper, the field of suspicion had been narrowed to two of three persons. The Government cannot even make up their minds whether it was two or three. Why is there this “or”? Either the field had been narrowed down to three perfons, or it had wot. Let us have a little more. precision. Let us at last depart from the verbal gymnastics in which, whoever it is who draws up these documents, is so pro-’ ficient. Had the field of suspicion been narrowed by mid-April to three persons? That is a simple question which I ho can be answered. Why play around with “two or three "2" eee Deb. 1 said that but for the fact that Burgess and Maclean disappeared, the Security Services might stil] have oot had any firm evidence sgainst them. The reason for that is very simple and is tacitly admitted by the White Paper. It is that even by, April, 1951, and possibly since, there was (“,.. no legally admissible evidence to port @ Prosecution under the Official Secrets Acts.” That is from paragraph 10. .:°-.* met Are we to allow the security of the Former A, Offices FT NOVEMBER 1955" hook. Ser. * 2 FS R neat WB neal he ah Eales Datla Tate Officials —Disoppearancg (See: Foreign Office Security Service and the Foreign Secretary himself could have had powers and sufficient information on- which to act which would have enabled’ the Foreign Secretary, without any prose- . cution under the Official Secretg Acts, to | take steps to ensure that the security of - the country was not endangered in future, If we are to rely on prosecutions undes. ° the Official Secrets Acts, then goodness knows in what difficulties and imbroglios we shall find ourselves: y 0. - 5. 1-2 9: - Mr. John Peyton (Yeovil) : Is the box and gallant Member sugeesting that these fwo men should have been arrested, with- out a charge being levelled against them. under the Official Secrets Acts? = it cite BE Licut.-Colonel Lipton: No. Ali i am suggesting is that these two men, foc _ Teasons quile apart from the Official - Secrets Acis, proved themselves unfitted to be in the Foreign Office. Why, there- ” fore, do we have to wait for the accumu-. Fation of sufficient evidence under the Official Secrets Acts to get rid of some drunks, homosexuals, or people tempcera- mentally unfited by reason of their : characters to occupy any position in Government Deparment? . oo ene rd - That is the point ¥ am trying to make and surely it is not a point which is diffi- cult to comprehend even by the most ignorant members of the general popu- lation who must not be told too much by the Foreign Office about what is going on. It is said that the field had been narrowed down to two or three persons, Let us assume that what the White Paper means is that the suspicions had been’ narrowed down to three persons. We. stil] do not know whether one of the three was Burgess. We have not yet been” told that - aoe = ay ae ees a The Joint Under-Secretary of State for- Foreign Affairs (Mr, R. H. Torton): The: bon. and gallant Member for Brixton (ieut.Colonel Lipion) should remember what was said by my right bon. Friend the Secretary of State Jor Foreign Affairs.’ He said that no suspicion rested upon. Burgess at the time of his disappearance.’ Clearly, the hon. and gallant Member did. not listen to my right hon. Friend's speech. - Lieut.-Colone! Lipton: I did bear him’ wee - ar " wt a ai country to hang in the balance until say that, but I hope that the Under-. ‘Bf oocsger coe st { Segally admissible evidence to support a Secretary Will also recall that I referred Pa. : prosecution uoder the Official Secrets Acts: to that point earlier when I suggested that’ pee Ue ee | 45 available? It ig quite obvious that the had he not disappeared, Burgess would i SRR Be mD2» co ee 7 et vpety tte wp ee HOE tm os Ae = - = a ee * -— =2 ee ee oe ee ee i" . ee ie ce eg - oe Terre OE Prey me. | ee en reo | |