§ Mr. OnslowI beg to move, Amendment No. 3, in page 3, line 22, leave out subsection (3) and insert:
'(3) It shall also, subject to subsections (3A) and (4) of this section, be an offence for any person intentionally to communicate any information which is false, misleading or deceptive in a material particular, where the communication of the information endangers the safety of an aircraft in flight or is likely to endanger the safety of aircraft in flight.(3A) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (3) of this section to prove—
- (a) that he believed, and had reasonable grounds for believing, that the information was true, or
1673 - (b) that, when he communicated the information, he was lawfully employed to perform duties which consisted of or included the communication of information and that he communicated the information in good faith in the performance of those duties'.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Miss Harvie Anderson)With this amendment it will be convenient to discuss Amendment No. 4, in page 3, line 24, leave out 'false' and insert:
'misleading, false or deceptive in any material particular'.
§ Mr. OnslowThe purpose of this amendment is to replace subsection (3) of Clause 2 of the Bill first by a provision which makes it an offence intentionally to communicate information which is false, misleading or deceptive in a material particular, where the communication of that information endangers the safety of an aircraft in flight or is likely to endanger the safety of aircraft in flight.
The hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Dan Jones) raised this point quite fairly in Committee and we spent a little time on it.
In so far as the amendment includes information which is misleading or deceptive, it would extend subsection (3) which as it now stands relates only to information which the giver knows to be false or which he has not reason to believe to be true. We have considered, and are satisfied, that to include misleading and deceptive information would not in fact bring us out of line with Article 1.1 e of the Montreal Convention. It is, we think, legitimate to interpret "false" in the context of that article as including information which is misleading or deceptive. I am indebted to the hon. Member for Hackney, Central (Mr. Clinton Davis) for suggesting in Committee that the clause should be extended in this way.
Secondly, the amendment would specify the defences open to a person charged with communicating information which is false, misleading or deceptive. It would be a defence for him to prove that he believed, and had reasonable grounds for believing, that the information was true. This means that, for example, any person who had reason to believe that there was a bomb on board an aircraft, though in fact there was not, would not be guilty 1674 of an offence if he acted as a good citizen and communicated this information.
I hope that I need not expand further on this point and that the amendment will commend itself to the House.
§ Mr. BishopI am pleased that the Government have moved the amendment. This matter was raised in Committee by my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, Central (Mr. Clinton Davis). It lines up with the Montreal Convention and with the wording of Section 19(1) of the Theft Act, which is appropriate. It is also a very concise wording and, more important, it protects the person who is the lawful instrument in communicating the information.
On the basis of the Minister's comment and the acceptance of our suggestion in Committee there is no need to move Amendment No. 4.
§ Amendment agreed to.