I move amendment No. 1:
In subsection (1), page 3, lines 21 and 22, to delete "or is expressed to be either".
I have a group of amendments which are more or less concentrated on the same point. First of all, I wish to delete certain words and these, which are in the Definition Section, have to be tied together with Section 2 (3). The Bill has two angles of approach. One is with regard to the preservation and security of the State and whatever is done in that regard is acceptable. Another group of sections deal with official information and this part of the Definition Section applies there. The old Acts dealt with espionage and anything that had to do with the protection of the State in regard to places where munitions were made, where there were dockyards, shipyards or any place where there were collections of personnel of the Defence Force type. That is one section. This legislation goes much wider than that and deals with what is called "official information". Part II is completely confined to official information and by Section 4 it is made an offence to communicate any official information.
I have tried by amendment to make it relate to matters prejudicial to the safety or interest of the State. This is just bold and plain. A person who communicates official information is guilty of an offence unless he is authorised. In other words, a person is presumed to be guilty the moment the fact is established that he has communicated to somebody else something called "official information." That, therefore, makes the definition of official information of great importance. In the definition of official information quite a number of words is used. It includes any plan or model or anything like that which is secret or confidential or is expressed to be secret or confidential and has been in the possession of a holder by virtue of his office.
This is one of the important matters arising, whether what has been communicated—because that would be a matter of fact—is official information. Official information can be anything, not what a court considers to be secret and confidential but something that is expressed to be. The full effect of that is to be seen from subsection (3) where a certificate given under the seal of a Minister that any code word, or certain other things, is secret or confidential is to be evidence and conclusive evidence. Therefore, I want to avoid the Minister being given the power to say something which is stamped in such way is secret or confidential and the court cannot consider whether the thing is secret or confidential or not. I am trying to make sure that this Part of the Act would only be applied in regard to things prejudicial to either the safety or—if you want it to go so far, although I do not—the interests of the State. All that is left out. The person may be prosecuted and all that has to be established is the fact that he communicated some information to somebody and, secondly, that there is a certificate from some Minister to say the matter communicated is secret or confidential. I think that is not a power that should be given. It would be lessening it if Part II contained in respect of the communication a guarding phrase that it was only to be in relation to things prejudicial either to the safety or interests of the State. As it is, it is a simple offence to communicate something which a Minister has sealed as secret or confidential and that proves the whole thing. The offence is then established. I do not think that is proper.
This Act is supposed to be a reproduction with modern attachments of the old Official Secrets Acts. They were for the purpose of espionage and matters dealing with war and matters that might be of use to an emeny. That is all cleared away. I do not think there is any necessity for it to go very much wider than the old Official Secrets Acts. I seek to minimise what is proposed by saying, first of all, that it must be secret and confidential. It must be the subject of a court inquiry. The court will say whether it is confidential or secret. I do not think the matter should be dressed up in this way that once communication is proved and the certificate is proved that is the end of the trial.