Code of Practice on the Management of Records

Citation

Moran, C. (2010), "Code of Practice on the Management of Records", Records Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/rmj.2010.28120aae.002

Code of Practice on the Management of Records

Code of Practice on the Management of Records

Article Type: Professional resources From: Records Management Journal, Volume 20, Issue 1

HMSOLondon2009

Keywords: Records management, Freedom of information, United Kingdom

This review considers the Lord Chancellor’s revised Code of Practice on the Management of Records Issued under Section 46 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2000 in the UK (the Code). The original Code was published in November 2002 with the intention that it would be reviewed within five years. A review commenced in 2007, led by The National Archives, and the revised Code was issued by the UK Government’s Ministry of Justice in July 2009 following a thorough consultation process.

The Freedom of Information Act, 2000 (the Act) requires that public authorities have adequate records management processes in place, after all “access rights are of limited value if information cannot be found when requested or, when found, cannot be relied upon as authoritative” (Ministry of Justice, 2009).

This review does not need to discuss the necessity of the Code. Anyone with experience of freedom of information, whether practitioner, requester or both, knows only too well that effective records management is a requirement for effective freedom of information. If a public authority does not know what information it holds then it is unlikely to be able to provide others with access to it. It is for this reason that section 46 of the Act prescribes for the Lord Chancellor to issue a Code of Practice on the management of records. It is notable that non-compliance with the Code may not only result in non-compliance with the Act but also with other information-related legislation such as the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Re-Use of Public Sector Information Regulations 2005.

On the surface, it may appear that not much has changed; however upon closer inspection the revised Code is clear, relevant and a useful tool to aid compliance with the Act and other information regulations and standards.

The general structure of the Code remains much the same in that there are two parts. Part 1 provides guidance to relevant authorities on the management of their records and Part 2 provides guidance on the review and transfer of public records.

The revised Foreword to the Code has much strength for the practitioner to utilise, starting with the importance of records management. The manifestation of this section is no doubt invaluable to all relevant practitioners, not only setting out that “records and information are the lifeblood of any organisation” (Ministry of Justice, 2009) but also providing a list of the risks to an authority created by poor records management.

In addition, the revised Foreword includes a detailed section on the role of the Information Commissioner in relation to Code and the powers available to him.

Although much of the content of the original Code has survived, it has been re-organised and Part 1 now guides you through the lifecycle of a record from creation to disposal with ease, providing best practice and recommendations for the management of records. The over-arching guidance statements for each of the sections of Part 1 have been collated and provided as a handy summary of recommended good practice in section 5.

Noticeably, the revised Code does not have a separate section for electronic records. Although the original Code recognised that the principles of records management apply to all records paper and electronic alike, it still had a separate section dedicated to electronic records. Each section of the revised Code clearly applies to all records, unless otherwise specified, and the definition of a record as provided by the relevant standard (British Standards Institution, 2001) is adopted throughout.

A section on records created in the course of collaborative working is a welcome addition to Part 1 of the Code, setting out the responsibilities for records created under such conditions. Also welcomed is guidance on how to monitor compliance with the Code and assessing the effectiveness of a records management programme. These sections are key to ensuring effective management of records within your organisation.

Mirroring the revisions made to Part 1, the revised Part 2 has been separated into handy sections, steering the relevant authorities through the process for reviewing and transferring public records.

Part 2 leads the practitioner through determining the access status of the public records they hold, to the actual transmission of the record. There is also clear guidance on access rights post-transfer of the record.

The Code is succeeded by two Annexes containing a wealth of information, from a glossary of the terms used to details of supporting guidance and standards. The provision of such information confirms the status of the Code as the definitive guidance needed by a practitioner for the effective management of records.

In conclusion, the revised Code is successful in fulfilling its aim. It clearly demonstrates that good records management is essential for all organisations, in particular those that have statutory obligations in relation to those records, and is welcomed by practitioners and FOI requesters alike.

Catherine MoranBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK

Freedom of Information Act (2000), “Chapter 36”, HMSO, London, available at: www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000036_en_1 (accessed 30 November 2009)

Ministry of Justice (2009), Lord Chancellor’s Code of Practice on the Management of Records Issued under Section 46 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, HMSO, London, available at: www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/docs/foi-section-46-code-of-practice.pdf (accessed 30 November 2009)