§ 23. Lieut.-Colonel Liptonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what date the appointments of Mr. Guy Burgess and Mr. Donald Maclean were officially terminated.
§ Mr. NuttingThe appointments of Mr. Guy Burgess and Mr. Donald Maclean were terminated on 1st June, 1952, with effect from 1st June, 1951, the date on which they were suspended from duty.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonCan the hon. Gentleman explain the reason for this extraordinary delay of one year in finally deciding to dispense with the services of these two men?
§ Mr. NuttingIt is because the search for them was continuing. Indeed, the search is still continuing. But, having been absent without leave for a year, my right hon. Friend has considered that as a disciplinary measure their appointments should be terminated and that they should be dismissed the Service.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonIs it to be understood that disciplinary measures can be applied to absconding Government civil servants only after they have absconded for 12 months? Is that an essential qualification which must be taken into account before people are given the sack?
§ Mr. NuttingNo, Sir.
§ Sir H. WilliamsWas not this information given about a fortnight ago in answer to one of my Questions?
§ Mr. NallyIn view of the fact that among large sections of the Press, during slack periods, it is becoming customary to fill in with stories about these two gentlemen, could the hon. Gentleman confirm or deny that it is a fact that prior to the departure of these two gentlemen they were in fact already being considered by the Foreign Office as not quite suitable for the offices which each of them held?
§ Mr. NuttingThat is another question and, what is more, it happened at a period when the present Government were not responsible. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could address his question to his right hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison).
§ Mr. NallyOn a point of order. I am sorry, but this is a relevant question and I would ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker, whether, when a question is within the purview of a Minister and he has the information which would enable him to reply now—although he can refuse—he is in order in referring me to his predecessor and suggesting that I take advantage of the procedure which does exist in this House but which is not used, whereby one private Member can address a question to another?
§ Mr. SpeakerI understood the reference to be somewhat jocular in its tone.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonIn view of the unsatisfactory reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter at the earliest possible moment on the Adjournment.