COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL AN EMBATTLED SECURITY SERVICE USES ITS VOICE

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31096, 27 June 1966, Page 12

COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL AN EMBATTLED SECURITY SERVICE USES ITS VOICE

(From Our Own Reporter) WELLINGTON, June 26. A conviction that the New Zealand Thdvereitv on trial by the public, rather than “Vietniks, Peacenik , a authorities, has persuaded the authorities to attempt t P security service is necessary to New Zealand. Following a television interview on Thursday nhfht with director of the New Zealand Security Service (Brigadiei H. EGilbert h the service approved two releases on Friday dealing P activities.

It is too early to try to assess the impact of these attempts to reach the public, but the fact that they were made indicates the difficult situation in which our security service is placed. It is the least publicised service which operates under the Government’s control. Nothing much can be done to improve its public image, for the more it has to be “explained away,” the less effective it becomes. A main trouble is that every time the existence of the service is revealed, whether this is because of the presence of a security officer in a university classroom or the expulsion of a foreign diplomat, the Security Service inevitably is put on trial by a large section of the public. Suspicion and Dislike The service is readily accused of such crimes as “the invasion of human rights.” These and similar charges may be eagerly supported, especially by people who might themselves be accused of readiness to invade or suppress the rights of others.

Apart from this, the Security Service suffers suspicion and active dislike as “the spy in our midst.” A normal per-

son does not like being observed and reported on, even though he has no thought of wrongdoing. This was discovered early in World War 11, when a security unit operated to see that military and other secrets were not given away to the enemy. There were no bouquets for the security officer who penetrated past careless guards into the inner sanctum of a war office —but the sentries received a “shake-up,” and the office was safer from the enemy as a result. Today Brigadier Gilbert can say little apart from the fact that the New Zealand Security Service was set up in 1956 as an integral part of the counter-intelligence defences of the Western democracies.

Five Columns In this year of 1966, he should not be required to. It is 30 years since the late Genera* Mola, one of Franco’s leaders, spoke of the five columns which would bring about the fall of Madrid. The four columns of his troops showed plainly on his strategic map. The fifth was invisible—in the city itself. To many New Zealanders who have been outside this country, it must seem incredible that so many of us know so little about the functions of a security service in a modern democracy. After all, it is nearly four years since the Russians, Andreev Shtykov, were expelled from New Zealand for proven attempts at espionage, and more than three since the Australian Federal Government took similar action over Skripov. Many responsible persons believe that if our Security Service had done nothing else, it would have “earned its keep” by bringing about these expulsions. The many other activities of the service, carefully policed, and under the direct control of the Prime Minister as the most powerful representative of the people, must be taken on trust. It is unlikely that this trust can ever be misplaced or abused. Juvenile Show The Opposition’s performance on Friday in delaying the rising of the House of Representatives for four and a quarter hours made several Opposition members happy and self-satisfied —but it was a somewhat juvenile show, productive of nothing

i more than their own and other people’s discomfort. ' When an Imprest Bill is j discussed, urgency is taken as 'a matter of course, and the 1 House continues without a break until either the closure is applied or the Opposition runs out of speakers. On Friday, the only time the bells rang was at the normal dinner-recess time, when so many members had wandered out of the House for their evening meal that fewer than the required quorum of 20 remained. The Opposition, which was responsible for the “stonewall,” was the worse offender. Rarely were more than 10 in the House after 6 p.m. When the House rose, there were 21 Government members and eight Opposition members still present. According to one source, one of the Christchurch members would have been "just about home” by that time. It took Mr R. J. Muldoon (Govt., Tamaki) to cap the evening with the reflection: ‘lt’s nice to finish on this note—with more people in the press gallery than on the Opposition benches.”