Security Service

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33932, 27 August 1975, Page 14

Security Service

Sir, — Reasons against a Security Intelligence Service are: (1) Any increase in socalled security will be at the cost of general invasion of privacy and rights of citizens. (2) A security service is interested in activity deemed by it to - be dangerous. Because its assessment of “dangerous” will run as wide as the imagination of its officers, all actions and opinions which are not strictly conventional are placed under possible surveillance. (3) Because the S.I.S. is secret (agents are unknown and may be infiltrated in any organisation) even when not present, it may be imagined to be. It, therefore, arouses suspicion amongst friends, people fear their telephones are tapped. No denial will convince because security services are known to lie. Thus the growth of secret political police undermines free expression, communication and development of ideas without which democracy languishes. Shortly, the S.I.S. is a subversive organisation. — Yours, etc., CIVIL LIBERTIES. August 26, 1975.

Sir, — I share B. Chamberlain’s concern about the campaign against the Security Intelligence Service and, as he does, question the motives of those who seek its abolition. It is to my mind, particularly disturbing that the deputy Prime Minister (Mr Tizard) should be of their persuasion. It would be a most revealing exercisp to ask all members of Parliament for a simple "ves” or “no” on the need tor the service. It would also be common justice to Brigadier H. E. Gilbert to give him the

promotion in rank he so patently deserves. — Yours, GRAHAM RHIND. August 26, 1975.