HC Deb 25 June 1956 vol 555 cc5-6
6. Mr. W. Griffiths

asked the Minister of Supply in how many cases his Department has represented to employers that an employee was a security risk; and in how many cases the employers concerned have taken action in regard to their employees as a result of such representations.

Mr. Maudling

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given to the then hon. Member for Broxtowe (Mr. Warbey) on 15th and 18th March, 1954, of which I am sending him copies. Mr. Lang's case is the only one subsequent to those seven in which these contractual powers have been involved.

Contractors have always been obliged to exclude from access to Government secrets employees regarded as security risks. In view of the length of time during which this procedure has been operating, it is not possible to give the figure for which the hon. Member asks.

Mr. Griffiths

Is the Minister aware that, although the number of men involved is not very great, nevertheless some of them have strenuously denied the suspicions and allegations which have been brought against them, but have not been as fortunate as Mr. Lang in their publicity? Can the reight hon. Gentleman not now tell the House that he is willing, retrospectively, to apply the procedure of the advisory tribunal to any men—and there are some of them—who still affirm that they have been dealt with unjustly?

Mr. Maudling

The Privy Council has recommended the application of the three advisers procedure to a certain range of cases, and that is being done, but in cases where Ministers have reached a decision I do not think the retrospective application of that procedure would serve any purpose.

15. Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

asked the Minister of Supply how many persons employed in his Department have been dismissed or transferred to other work on security grounds during each of the last three years; and in how many cases private firms employed on Government contracts were informed that they would not be given Government contracts in future unless they took similar action.

Mr. Maudling

In 1953, one officer in my Department was dismissed and two transferred to other work on security grounds; in each of the years 1954 and 1955, two officers were transferred and none dismissed. There has been no case in the current year. The case of Mr. Lang is the only occasion on which the placing of further secret contracts has been made dependent on action being taken in regard to a named person.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that, in all these cases, the person concerned was first given adequate details of the complaint against him and then a proper opportunity of being heard in his own defence?

Mr. Maudling

In all the cases I have referred to, the procedure laid down originally in 1948 has been followed.