On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 21:37:58 +0000, Guy Etchells via <genbrit@rootsweb.com> wrote: >On 22/10/2015 12:26, Charles Ellson via wrote: >>> I thought the 100 year ruling had been challenged? >>> >> Weren't people being specifically told by 1921 that their census >> details would be secret for 100 years ? >> >> >The 1939 National Registration will be released next month. > >The 100 year rule was brought in by Statutory Instrument in 1966 and >repealed in 2000. >It is now nothing more than a non statutory office policy. > >The Census Act 1920 did not mention anything about the census being >withheld or private for 100 years. > >The Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991 which amends the Census Act 1920 >prevents any census taken under the Census Act 1920 from being released >ever. > That isn't how I read it as the 1920 Act addresses the taking and running of the census only so long as the records are in the custody of the Registrars General. It makes no reference to amending the Public Records Act 1958 and similar legislation; also it deals with penalties for unlawful disclosure of information, persons to which it applies and the penalties but it does not define what is unlawful disclosure. The 1920 Act only seems to concern itself with the specific forms of unlawful disclosure mentioned within it. >A change of law would be required to make that legal, otherwise it could >be released today. > Or transfer of the records to somewhere outwith the control of the relevant Registrar General ?