HC Deb 18 February 1971 vol 811 cc2115-7
37. Mr. Lipton

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will introduce legislation to amend the Official Secrets Act, 1911.

77. Mr. Driberg

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will review the workings of the Official Secrets Acts, with particular reference to the recent tendency of governments to extend the scope of the Acts beyond their original purpose of combating espionage and other serious threats to national security.

34. Mr. Jopling

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to review the operation of the Official Secrets Act.

Mr. Maudling

I have decided to appoint a committee to carry out a full review of the operation of Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act, 1911. I am glad to inform the House that Lord Franks has agreed to serve as chairman of the committee. The names of the other members will be announced shortly.

Mr. Lipton

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Official Secrets Act, 1911, is inequitable, inefficient and out of date? Is he aware that we do not want a long-drawn-out review because, in the meantime, this Act gravely affects the freedom of the Press, and speedy action is required?

Mr. Maudling

It is because of the seriousness of the issues involved that a thorough review by a committee under such a distinguished person as Lord Franks is to start work.

Mr. Driberg

While warmly welcoming that reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if the committee will include, besides representatives of the security services and lawyers, who are no doubt necessary, any ordinary lay people such as those who have been or some day might be victims of the wider application of this Act?

Mr. Maudling

I will bear that suggestion in mind.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Has my right hon. Friend and have the Law Officers studied the editorial in the New Statesman by the right hon. Member for Coventry, East (Mr. Crossman) describing his search of Cabinet papers? Is this in conformity with the Official Secrets Act?

Mr. Maudling

I always read the right hon. Gentleman's articles with great interest. However, I do not think that the article to which my hon. Friend refers arises on this Question.

Mr. Callaghan

As the Official Secrets Act is to be reviewed, why limit the review to Section 2? Why should not the committee be free to consider the impact of other Sections?

Mr. Maudling

Because it is Section 2 which has been criticised.

Mr. Callaghan

Is not it the case that there has been continuing criticism of other Sections of the Act, and that there were earlier preliminary discussions with a view to making a much wider review than that now proposed? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the matter again and at least give a committee in which he has so much confidence, under the chairmanship of such a distinguished figure, the right to look at the whole Act?

Mr. Maudling

I will look at any suggestion that the right hon. Gentleman makes. However, there is a big distinction between Sections 1 and 2. The distinction is pointed out in Question No. 77. My impression is that there is a great difference between the two, and the criticism in recent cases has been of Section 2.