Restrictions on access to the diaries of Lord and Lady Mountbatten should “no more confusion and delay”, Congressman There is a urge.
In 2010, a £2 million inheritance grant allowed the University of Southampton to purchase the Broadlands Archive, which contained 4,500 boxes of official documents and personal letters from key Victorian figures.
The documents of Mountbatten, Burma, the last governor of India, are part of the collection-including handwritten notes written by Mahatma Gandhi to Mountbatten, detailing his vow of silence.
Lord Mountbatten, uncle of the Duke of Edinburgh and mentor to the Prince of Wales, was Irish Republican Army In County Sligo, Ireland In 1979.
The multi-party congressional group led by Julian Lewis, a veteran Conservative party, expressed concern about the lack of access to the Mountbatten couple’s personal diaries and highlighted the ongoing campaign of biographer Andrew Lowney.
In an early bill submitted by the House of Commons, the members stated: “This House pointed out that…Before the sale to the university, the Mountbatten family had provided the diary to the historian at the request of the historian; Mrs. Mountbatten was never a civil servant, so Her work is not restricted by freedom of information; in December 2019, the Information Commissioner’s Office ordered the university to disclose Mountbatten’s diaries and letters; this continues to be resisted in the obvious direction Cabinet Office Cited the FOI (Freedom of Information) exemption, but refused to determine the standards related to Mountbatten Diary. “
Frankly speaking, trying to close the stable door for so long after the horses are running wild and their jockeys have already left is futile.
The motion added: “It is deeply regrettable that their outstanding biographer, Dr. Andrew Lowney, has so far had to pay £250,000 to get the diary published to historians; and therefore require public disclosure and not to further confuse it. And procrastination.”
The Labour Party, Scottish National Party, Liberal Democrats and DUP MPs signed the motion together with other Conservative MPs.
New Forest East District Councilor Mr. Lewis said: “Although I fully appreciate government Consider retaining any official documents retained by Lord Mountbatten, even now that they have not been approved for publication. This obviously does not apply to private documents and diaries that were once open for inspection and sold on the open market.
“Frankly, trying to close the stable door so long after the horses are running wild and their jockey has already left is futile.”
Mr. Lowney, the author of “Mountbatten: Their Life and Love”, said the case raised “significant questions about censorship of our history, abuse of government power and taxpayer funds, and freedom of speech.”
He added: “The government claims to abide by Lord Mountbatten’s promise, but these are personal letters and diaries from his family, sold to the highest bidder.
“Any promise is only related to official documents he has, and it predates the Freedom of Information Act of 2000. It is crucial that the government must bear the responsibility to explain their censorship system.”
In response to a written question from Parliament on the matter, the Minister of the Cabinet Office, Julia Lopez, said: “Before he retired as Chief of Defense Staff in 1965, the first earl Mountbatten admitted that personal diaries must be reviewed before they can be accessed. public area. .
“Earl Mountbatten made it clear that the ownership of all these documents will be transferred to the Broadlands trustee.
“In 1969, the Broadlands trustee promised that they would not access these documents in general or specific manner without the express permission of the then Prime Minister through the Cabinet Secretary. A copy of the promise is available at the National Archives.
“According to the agreement, the Cabinet Office will continue to work with the University of Southampton to support the release of Mountbatten files, while ensuring that sensitive and official information is handled appropriately and in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act and the Data Protection Act.
“The case is currently being heard in the Information Court. Therefore, it is inappropriate to make further comments under the circumstances that this is subject to the ongoing legal process.”
The university described Mountbatten’s papers as an archive of “primary importance to the research of most of the 20th century” and included approximately 4,000 Earl’s papers.
According to the university, access to the database is “allowed only” and is subject to registration procedures.
