Notebook
To the extent that it belonged to the Astors, albeit the Astors of English adoption, the Observer was in Anglo-American hands. The ownership (or 90 per cent of it) now passes to truly American hands, with what consequences no one can yet be sure. At all events, Mr David Astor was well pleased with the week's work when the transaction was announced on Wednesday. He seemed quite exhilarated. He had been out to Los Angeles a few days earlier and the arrangement was concluded at high—even breakneck—speed. Lord Goodman, chairman of the trustees, was equally pleased; likewise Lord Barnetson, who is to join the board. Mr Donald Trelford's emotions were no doubt a mixture of pleasure and relief: he is to retain the editorship, which he would probably have lost had Mr Rupert Murdoch taken over. Mr Murdoch is said to be disappointed, and so is Mr Vere Harmsworth, another contender.
The Atlantic Richfield Company, which now enters Fleet Street so surprisingly, is headed by Mr Robert Anderson, an ex ceedingly wealthy landowner in America. He is 59, bought land when he was young— and some of the land produced oil. Mr Anderson will be arriving in London next month. His colleague Mr Douglas Cater, who was here this week, describes him as 'a business statesman of the first order.'
The main reason for Mr Merlyn Rees's decision to deport the former CIA agent, Philip Agee, appears to be Mr Agee's alleged contacts with Cuban foreign intelligence officers. Mr Agee vigorously denies this accusation, but M16, in a report on his recent visits to Jamaica and France, insists that he met people actively involved in espionage operations against the United Kingdom. The Cuban intelligence service, the DGI, has been under close KGB supervision since 1968. It specialises in providing false passports for Palestinian terrorist movements, and four years ago it drafted a plan to train IRA volunteers in guerrilla tactics. The scheme was to have been mounted by Cuban 'diplomats' based in London, but it never got off the ground. As British Intelligence officers are known to be priority targets for the Provisional IRA, this explains Mr Rees's statement that the decision to deport Mr Agee was 'taken solely in the interests of the security of Britain and of the personal safety of individuals who were in the service of the Crown.' British intelligence sources deny that the deportation decision was a result of CIA pressure, as some Labour MPs seem to believe. British interests, they claim, were paramount throughout. The American journalist. Mark
Hosenball, was ordered to leave Britain because of his association with Mr Agee. It does not follow from all this that Mr Agee was necessarily endangering British security; having contacts with foreign agents does not automatically imply sympathy with them, although Mr Agee would appear to be motivated by his personal vendetta against the CIA. Mr Rees may have had excellent reasons for deporting the two Americans, but it is a pity he felt unable to spell them out more fully.
Still on the subject of security, it is a little known fact that alone among the member states of the Western Alliance, the British parliament is banned from receiving secret briefings on how NATO's money is spent and to what effect. Members of every other NATO parliament, including Socialists hostile to almost any defence expenditure, are permitted to probe freely into NATO's affairs. Only British MPs are precluded from interrogating senior NATO officers to the same extent. This strange situation has been drawn to the Prime Minister's attention by a Conservative MP, Mr Peter Viggers, former RAF pilot who recently toured NATO's southern flank with a delegation of nearly forty parliamentarians from Western countries. On several occasions, the delegates were told that specific questions could not be answered because British MPs had not been 'screened for security purposes.' It was implied that, if British MPs had not been present, detailed answers would have been given. In contrast to Westminster, other parliaments have defence committees whose members are vetted by counter-espionage organisations. Senior NATO staff are therefore permitted to brief them on secret matters, whereas British MPs can only be advised on a 'confidential' basis—the lowest grade of security classification. Mr Viggers wants to see a voluntary system of security vetting by MI5 for Menlbers who take a particular interest In NATO. While this would be a departure from the tradition that an MP's integritY and patriotism are to be taken on trust, it seems a sensible enough proposal under the circumstances. It is not as if NATO is alone in failing to assume that all British l'es are of spotless virtue.
Last week Sir Harold Wilson lost his temper. He was cross because—in his own words— 't he pair was withdrawn.' That is to say, the Conservative opposition declined to Pr°vide a pair so that he could travel to Geneva to receive an award. It is a moot point whether the Tories or the former Prinle Minister caused more offence to Sir Harold s putative hosts. Sir Harold said he was de" nied a chance of attending upon the 'World Zionist Congress': he had been asked to the World Jewish Congress. He claimed, t° reporters, that he was to be the recipient of the first Gold Medal of the Congress: not so, the award was made last year. FinallY, though Sir Harold claims that he did tint know of the refused pair before he was Or terrupted at a social welfare lunch, he had already made an arrangement to sign coPles of his latest book at Selfridges on the day he should have been in Geneva.
A heavy overdose of nil nisi bunkum seems t° have overcome most of the obituarists of the late Sir Basil Spence Ca sensitive gifted, man, not without a great sense of furl' 'excellent company,' a very good architee! indeed'). Others may remember Sir Baskil more clearly for the petulant way in whie," he reacted to the criticisms which surrounor ed so much of his work in later years. There was one poignant TV interview in which tle was confronted with two Glasgow house' wives, who had had the misfortune to he forcibly rehoused at the top of one of his windswept blocks of council flats. TheYi diffidently explained some of the practiea difficulties of living in his building (nowherf to hang washing, kitchens too small ete)'s His impatient dismissal of their complaint because they were not trained architects' and were therefore unqualified to pass corn' ment on his designs, was a perfect mice(); cosm of the gulf which has yawned betvieeu modern architects and their victims. More celebrated was the interview h'ch f Sir Basil gave to The Times at the height °,5 the great row in 1972 over his Queen Anne, Mansions office block (which now 10111' hideously over St James's Park). He WaSj he said 'mortally wounded at being reject% by this criticism. Only ten years ago I g131) awarded the Order of Merit. I was 8ive.n honorary degrees, and I was very Much blis demand . . . the public criticism of t building is a fundamental affront to alleth reputation as an architect. I believe
ny
public has been misled. Their ignorance a5 lack of understanding particularly arige me.' A 'great sense of fun' indeed!
specto
Previous page
