§ Dr. David Clarkasked the Prime Minister whether a formal warning was given to Anthony Blunt's solicitor prior to her parliamentary answer of 15 November; and, if so, why.
§ The Prime MinisterIn view of the previous publicity we thought it reasonable to tell Professor Blunt's legal adviser that a statement was to be made in this House the following day which would disclose the facts about Professor Blunt's confession and about the activities to which he had confessed. There was no reason not to do this, since there were no grounds on which criminal proceedings could be instituted.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Prime Minister if she will set up a public inquiry into the full security implications of the Blunt affair.
§ The Prime MinisterNo decision has yet been taken.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Prime Minister, in the light of the fact that the Prime Minister in 1964 was not informed of the spying activities of Anthony Blunt by the then head of MI5, whether she will institute new procedures to ensure that a similar failure to inform her does not recur in future.
§ The Prime MinisterNo. The arrangements for the political control of the Security Service remain as set out in Sir David Maxwell Fyfe's directive of 24 September 1952, the general principles of which, together with their application, were endorsed by Lord Denning's report—Cmnd. 2152, paragraphs 238 to 241.
§ Mr. Meacherasked the Prime Minister if she will make a further statement regarding the other public services in which it is suspected that there may have been penetration by foreign security services in relation to the Blunt affair.
§ The Prime MinisterThe reference to "other public services" in my answer of92W 15 November to the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Leadbitter) was intended to allow for the fact that Burgess and Maclean had been members of the Diplomatic Service.