MoD Withholding 66,000 files in Breach of 30 Year Rule

[Observer1940]

I have banged on about this for several years now, that not all files older than 30 years were being withheld by the PRO (now TNA) at Kew, but thousands of files are still classified on extended retention at the MoD's own Archive run by TNT.

See Ian Cobain's article in The Guardian 6th October 2013

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...-files-archive

Mark

[edwest]

Meanwhile, documents from World War II are being withheld.




Ed

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by edwest

Meanwhile, documents from World War II are being withheld.
Ed

Which ones did you have in mind, Ed?

[Observer1940]

Hello Nick and Ed

Parliament's Hansard has already admitted in 2004 that the "Aircraft board of inquiry" were "separated" from the main files:-

http://www.publications.parliament.u...t/41020h02.htm

Further to the original post, I now hear the Foreign Office have a secure secret archive and are withholding 1.2 million files covering the Cold War, both World Wars and beyond.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...secret-archive

"The Foreign Office has unlawfully hoarded more than a million files of historic documents that should have been declassified and handed over to the National Archives, the Guardian has discovered."

"The files are being kept at a secret archive at a high-security government communications centre in Buckinghamshire, north of London, where they occupy mile after mile of shelving."

"Most of the papers are many decades old – some were created in the 19th century – and document in fine detail British foreign relations throughout two world wars, the cold war, withdrawal from empire and entry into the common market."

Mark

[John Beaman]

Mark,

I am, being a US citizen, completely ignorant of British "secrecy" laws. I recall the crap about the ULTRA files which were finally released to our great delight. But, regarding what you are trying to get, what does the law say? If some areas are withholding documents, is it legal or is some mid-level administrator/lawyer making his own decisions about what can be released?

Just curious?

[Observer1940]

Hello John

According to an old online article written by a Public Record Office (now TNA) Record Manager (since retired now, I believe) about his time at the former repository at Hayes. What actually happened was that Hayes was looked upon as a mid-way repository (a half way house as it were) between the Government Department responsible for releasing the files at 30 years and the Public Record Office (since TNA), Kew.

Hayes was once run mainly by PRO staff and because of the former PRO involvement at the Hayes Archive it satisfied the 30 year rule of the Government Department handing the documents over. However, in the 1990s the Government Department retook control if I understood the article correctly.

What happened next with Hayes was that TNT Archives (a private company) won or were given a contract by the MoD to take over the Hayes Archive which housed the 'Military Record Office', they catalogued the files finishing around 2004 I believe and transfered all the Hayes (MoD) files to their purpose built facility at Swadlincote, England. Technically (not sure Legally) TNT currently actually hold the MoD files and records and not the MoD Department, although the MoD can call a file, provided TNT can find it.

But it is believed that some information is within a file and therefore may not show up in a database file title search (the same as public files at TNA, Kew).

At one time TNA publicly (on their website) advised enquirers of TNT Archives contact details and address to write to.

It was reported in a TNT Press article I have, indicating that TNT have custody of 20 million items for the MoD, of which 13 million are files.

This TNT news article was never denied when I recently took our Information Commissioner to a Tribunal.

I lost my case on the basis that the £600 FOI limit (time/admin) cost had been exhausted by those searching, also that searches return no trace and therefore it must be assumed that the official Court of Inquiry into the loss of the WW2 Casualties who all have civil British Death Certificates confirmed to the British Registrar by the RAF in 1940 according to each Death Certificate, must have been destroyed and my Freedom of Information appeal was dismissed by the Judge.

Each British Government Department have reviewers called a "Reviewer" or "Sensitivity Reviewer" and it is these people who make the decisions about withheld files, being released to TNA, Kew.

I cannot say too much about other Departments as I have had no dealings with them, but I have seen several books by authors published since 2000 covering Intelligence since WW1 where they went both to PRO/TNA and also direct to the Government Department concerned apparently, to do their research.

I believe that it is very highly likely (I should say certainly likely) that there is some truth in Cobain's article. But how do we know what is held, when you cannot access the repository and the Department claims they cannot find it.

Inquiries into deaths are apparently treated like Coroners Inquiries, which means 75 year closure (except the family who can access a Coroners Inquiry). However, the latest is that information about War Casualties and Deaths shortly to be released will be limited to certain classes of death only, I think 'FB' ['flying battle'] casualties is the phrase and NOT accidental or other losses.

Mark

[edwest]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Which ones did you have in mind, Ed?

Documents related to the activities of the British T-Force. This organization had Target lists, captured enemy personnel of interest, and factories, workshops, equipment, devices, documents and anything else deemed of importance, including "targets of opportunity" that they stumbled upon.



Ed

[Nick Beale]

Thanks Ed. Most of the media controversy over here at the moment is over material from the 1950s and brutality in former colonies. It's interesting to know that WW2 stuff is still out of reach as well.

[Observer1940]

Hello Nick

Sent you a PM re WW2.

Mark

[Nick Beale]

The Foreign Office files are in the news again: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...e-secret-files