Thank you for contacting me about the National Security Bill and the potential impact it could have on journalists. 

Firstly I welcome the National Security Bill, which I believe builds on the recommendations of the Russia report,  Intelligence and Security Committee and the Law Commission and delivers long-overdue updates to our current legislation. 

As threats and technologies have evolved and been exposed, so too have the gaps in the legislative defences necessary to keep our country safe from hostile state threats.

In my view the Government has been too slow to notice and react to the emerging trend towards hostile state activity over recent years, particularly in the wake of the 2018 Salisbury poisonings.  

Therefore I support the strong powers in the Bill to tackle hostile state activity in order to protect our democracy and national interests. Nevertheless I felt it was important to support amendments to ensure there is appropriate oversight of these powers in line with the oversight that exists for other comparable powers. 

In your email you highlighted amendment NC8, which was not voted on as the Bill was debated in Parliament. I do however share your concerns about the impact measures in the Bill could have on whistleblowers and journalists.

The Law Commission, which the Government tasked with reviewing the Official Secrets Act, accepted the need for – and proposed creating – a public interest defence and establishing a statutory independent commission to ensure adequate protection to public interest disclosures. Indeed, three of our four Five Eyes partners already have a mechanism that provides a public interest defence with regard to disclosures of this nature.

It is of course important to protect from public disclosure information that could harm our national security if revealed. However, the effective functioning of the security services within our democracy relies on the trust of the British people and their elected representatives, with the necessary transparency and oversight to make accountability a real part of their work.

There are measures that I expected to form part of the Bill that are missing, as well as genuine questions about the oversight of the powers within it and the appropriate scrutiny of how and when those powers are used.

Thus, I am pleased that Labour pushed the Government to fix current problems in the Bill at Report Stage, by introducing: 

Amendment 6 – Introducing exemptions for victims of domestic abuse from the Part 4 civil legal aid restrictions for terrorist offenders

NC3 – Requiring oversight of the powers contained within the Bill by an independent commissioner

Amendment 14 – Removing Clause 27 

I recognise that these are complex issues, but I hope the Government will reconsider these issues as the Bill undergoes further scrutiny in the House of Lords.  

I will follow any developments closely.