
'Nothing to do with the Freedom of Information Act coming in, honest...'
By Dan Ilett
Published: 20 December 2004 14:30 GMT
The Cabinet Office denied on Monday that millions of emails are being deleted in response to a law that will make government information available to the public from 1 January.
The Civil Service department insisted the move was part of an ongoing management policy to avoid wasting taxpayers' money and not a way of ducking the Freedom of Information Act (FoI).
A spokesperson for the Cabinet Office said: "This is about management of record systems. This is not about trying to quieten down or hide things before 1 January. It's nothing to do with FoI. It's about making sure that staff have been managing and deleting emails properly."
Civil servants have been ordered to delete 'unimportant' emails more than three months old, and to print out and archive 'important' emails.
The Cabinet Office (CO), which is the Prime Minister's right-arm department, said it would not monitor its 2,000 staff deleting emails because it was each employee's responsibility to judge the situation.
The FoI, which comes into force in 11 days, will allow public access to some government records, excluding confidential information or enquiries that would cost more than £600 in administration.
But many inside Parliament have criticised the Civil Service for acting irresponsibly.
Lord Erroll, member of European internet security lobbyist EURIM, said: "It's impractical and they're working on an idiotic time scale to do this. But the CO might think what they have is embarrassing. The time scale is unrealistic and there will be some miscarriages of justice. It's a knee-jerk reaction and will have an effect on useful information in cases. If they do purge emails that are only three months old, a lot of background information on things will be lost for good."
The move could make it tougher for independent inquiries, such as the recent David Blunkett enquiry or the Hutton report, to look into government records.
"We should be embracing data and storage," said Erroll. "If we'd only behave more seriously towards emails and realise they are more akin to people talking rather than official documents."
Financial regulations, such as Sarbanes Oxley and Basel II, stipulate that companies must store all emails for at least seven years. Although none have been convicted yet, chief executive officers found to have failed in such auditing regulations can face heavy fines and jail sentences.
Au contraire, deleted emails should be ARCHIVED.
...
Anonymous
Why should emails be archived? Are you going to in...
Ian J. Kennedy
What nonsense, since when has a government and par...
Charles Wood
exactly, and while it's unrealistic to try and rec...
Anonymous
Just before the Berlin wall fell in November 1989 ...
Steve Watkins
Ensure protective monitoring and auditing of ICT systems and processes. Provide specialist advice and guidance to staff on information security, DPA ...
You will not be expected to attend the office during these hours, it will be operated using a mobile phone and paper based system in accordance with ...
Project Manager - NHS - Clinical Records. The Project Manager will need experience of clinical records or medical records projects. The Project ...
Agenda Setters 2008
Welcome to the ninth annual Agenda Setters poll – silicon.com's list of the top 50 most influential individuals in the technology and IT industries, from techies and CIOs to entrepreneurs and business leaders. Find out more in our latest special report.
Stories from the web...
Copyright © 2008 CBS Interactive Limited. All rights reserved. Top of page
Mark McDonald CIOs: Go large for services The bigger the better
Stuart Packham Looking for a job? Look no further Five top recruitment trends