INDISCREET ACTS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 146, 2 April 1941, Page 3

INDISCREET ACTS

LETTERS AND CABLEGRAMS.

INFORMATION FOR THE ENEMY

COMMENT BY COMMISSION. (Sp.) WELLINGTON, April 1. The indiscretion of New Zealanders in mentioning the movements of ships in their air-mail letters and in other ways is described as “unintelligent’' and “selfish” by the Commission of inquiry whose report on the leakage of information from New Zealand was made available.

Upon the outbreak of war it was determined by the authorities that, consquent upon the position in the Pacific, it would be necessary to shroud the movCmhts of shipping in the utmost secrecy, states the commission.

“The evidence compels us to conclude,” adds the report “that there are large sections of the community which have never appreciated the Wisdom of this decision, that it has never received their active support and co-operation, bait, on the contrary, that it lias been hindered and frustrated by a great deal of very unintelligent and selfish indiscretion.”

The Controller of Censorship (Mr G. McNamara) had informed the commission that, in censoring air-mail, it had been found that the New Zealand public had been indiscreet to a remarkable degree in mentioning the movement of ships. Mr McNamara stated: “Tt is not peculiar to New Zealand. The censorship authorities in Australia in their reports tell us that the same thing happens there. They cannot understand why the public are continually writing about ships and the like and troops going away. Bad In New Zealand. “It is very bad in New Zealand particularly. I do not think it is anything but indiscretion. People will tell the men overseas everything that happens. When we had the big fleet in here and the warships leaving about five months ago 1 know that not only were the names of the warships given, but particulars of their armament. The names of all vessels convoying the troops were given, and where they were to lie in the convoy.” In one week fifty-nine cablegrams emanating from Auckland had to be amended to conceal the movements and location of troop, Naval and Air Force units, stated Mr McNamara. In the same week fifty-nine cablegrams emanating from Wellington had to be amended for the same reason. In the

same period three radio messages from Wellington had to be altered to conceal routes of ships, and in that same week six cable messages from Auckland and four from Wellington were cancelled because they gave information about troop movements. Public Stupidity. “It can readily be understood that this species of stupidity on the part of the public is very disheartening” states the commission. “Apparently none of these rash correspondents has ever envisaged the possibility of our air-mail falling into the hands of the enemy. “Mr McNamara also says that the shipping companies in their cablegrams, telegrams, and mail correspondence frequently mention matters which should nop ho mentioned. He added that the difficulty of controlling this kind of thing was increased by the fact that uncoded cablegrams which freely indicated the projected movements of shipping, were constantly arriving from Australia. A file of recent cablegrams from Australia to the Internal Market-

ing Department, which confirms and exemplifies this portion of Mr McNamara’s evidence, was put before, us by the Solicitor-General, who had received it on loan from the Navy Office, Wellington. The* matter is apparently under discussion between the Dominion and the Commonwealth authorities. It is to be hoped that a solution will be reached which assists the authorities here in enforcing more careful behaviour by shipping offices in

New -Zealand. Passengers’ information. “Some evidence which we took in Auckland suggests that there is room for much tightening up in the matter of information as to probable sailing dates given to intending passengers. It is true that they are not told the actual sailing date. But the practices followed, in our opinion, enable them, to make an accurate prediction of the date. They talk about this, and so it becomes public property. “Wo are satisfied that indiscreet talk about intended or'expected shipping movements is deplorably common. A particularly had example records two moil,.who. should have known hotter gossiping about certain intended shipping movements and movements ' of troops in most unsuitable places and at a time when the particular intended movements were still very secret, and it was important that they should remain secret. The matter is now stale, and no harm, in fact, came of it. But it was all highly dangerous and deplorable. And the most disturbing circumstance is that, inasmuch as the information proved to bo completely correct, the incident points to serious broach of confidence, by some undiscovered person who was entrusted with or improperly became possessed of confidential information.

“Unfortunately, we wore unable to carry this matter further because the originator of this reprehensible gossip assured us on oath that after the most earnest efforts ho had been unable to recall from whom he had obtained his information. He acted very wrongly in repeating it, as does everyone who seeks to pry into matters upon which, for the national safety, it lias boon determined that secrecy should he observed, or who repeats, circulates, eleven listens to alleged information or surmises upon such topics. “Wo fear that there is not, as yet, any public conscience upon this matter and that, on the contrary, it is considered clever to knotv anything about

matters which the authorities arc tlying to keep secret. “Another example of surprising thoughtlessness is recorded. It appears that a responsible officer of the Marketing Department, who is required by the nature of his duties to have in his possession written partieulars of a very secret nature of the future movements of shipping, had the habit ol walking out of his room at lunch-time leaving the documents lying on his table in his unlocked, empty room, to which any member of the public might easily obtain access.

“It further appears that there is really no reason why these secret particulars should not ho concealed by a system of code ; hut it is only at this stage of the war that this question is receiving attention. Three criticisms, in our opinion, may fairly be made: — (1) A system of code to assist in concealing dates and names seems feasible, hut is only now under consideration ; (2) More information has been, going out to some interested parties than they really required to have; (3) inforhmtion has been given to some interested parties before" they really required to have it.