MOST of the 114 missing Home Office documents potentially linked to child sex abuse allegations in Westminster appear to be about routine inquiries from politicians, according to the department's top official.
Permanent Secretary Mark Sedwill said the titles of the files could not be released yet despite a request from the Home Affairs Select Committee, because they contained personal data that needed to be edited out.
But the mandarin said he had reviewed the list, adding: "Most appear to have contained correspondence from Members of Parliament either asking about government policy or on behalf of constituents."
Mr Sedwill said that kind of correspondence would "normally have been destroyed after two years under the file destruction policy of the time".
In a letter to the committee chairman Keith Vaz today, Mr Sedwill said he had done its bidding by studying the list of titles - but could not yet publish it. He said: "As many of the file titles in the list contain the names of individuals it will have to be redacted before I can provide it to the committee in order both to protect the privacy of the individuals and to avoid the risk of prejudicing ongoing criminal investigations into historic child abuse."
He added that the same applied to the full report of the review - executive summaries of which have already been released.
As a result, they may not be published until a second review of the Home Office's handling of allegations, being carried out by NSPCC head Sir Peter Wanless and Richard Whittam QC is complete in eight to 10 weeks' time.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article