Thank you for the question.
The language refers to “the content of the intelligence that is emitted, transmitted or received”, so it's not referring just to content in a generalized, colloquial sense.
The other thing is that it further.... I don't think this is the intent of the amendment, to be clear, but in conjunction with proposed section 15.02, which is very clearly about speech issues.... Normally, you don't have text added unless it's there for a purpose. Proposed section 15.01 has, very much, the risk of communicating that it's actually not about speech, because that's what proposed section 15.02 is about, so proposed section 15.01 is about something different, presumably.
When we get into the content of the intelligence, in terms of what is actually being transmitted, in a technical sense it's all zeros and ones, ultimately, with how it gets converted into signalling. When we're talking about the actual intelligence that's being transmitted, some zeros and ones could be malware, and some zeros and ones could be expressive speech. The telecom act already does not allow for government control of expressive speech. That has no bearing on the telecom act, so it's already not captured.
I totally appreciate the concern for greater certainty, but that is the reason why.... Proposed section 15.02 is just consistent with the overall scheme.