Member News
By Lord Lester of Herne Hill - 8th March 2010
Lord Lester of Herne Hill writes for ePolitix.com ahead of his question on the review of the period of time which passes before the government transfers its records to the National Archives.
The '30 years rule' refers to the legal arrangements, prescribed by the Public Records Act 1958, under which the government transfers its records to the National Archives with a view to their being made available to the public.
In October 2007, the 30-Year Rule Review Committee, chaired by Paul Dacre, was asked by the government to consider the continued appropriateness of these arrangements, following the implementation of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, in 2005. In January 2009 the committee concluded that the interaction between these provisions results in an illogical and inconsistent situation, in which the differential release of documents makes it impossible to build up a fully rounded picture of past events, and which can be misleading.
The committee therefore recommended that the 30-year rule be replaced with a 15-year rule, to be effected by appropriate amendments to the Public Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act.
I agree with the Dacre committee that the release of official documents not only improves the public's access to information but also contributes to better governance and public accountability. In my view therefore, there should be a substantial reduction to the 30-year rule.
Since I put down my starred question the government has at last responded to the committee's recommendations and has tabled amendments to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, reducing the 30-year rule to 20 years via amendments to the Public Records Act and Freedom of Information Act.
The amendments have been approved by the House of Commons. I very much welcome this development.
However, I am concerned that the government has not proposed effective measures to deal with the backlog of information which will become available under the new regime, despite agreeing that the new rule should apply retrospectively. The committee recommended that the government should make specific provision for the implementation period, and without this it seems likely that we will have to wait some time before the changes have any real effect. I also remain concerned that some unnecessary exemptions will continue to operate.
Dods Parliamentary Communications Ltd