Public Record Office (Hansard, 14 March 1994)

§ 36. Mr. Lidington
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many members of the public visited the Public Record Office search rooms in Chancery lane during 1993.

The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. John M. Taylor)
A total number of 104,429 reader visits were made to the Public Record Office search rooms at the Chancery lane site during 1993. The census microfilm search room accounted for 76,798 of the visits, while the remaining 27,000-odd visits were to the search rooms for original documents.

§ Mr. Lidington
The Department's plan to shift the PRO'_s facilities in their entirety to Kew will create difficulties of access for many readers who use Chancery lane. Will my hon. Friend consider keeping the Chancery lane search rooms open, perhaps as a family history centre, so that people can use the microfilm and other facilities?

Mr. Taylor
No decision has yet been made about the future use of the Chancery lane site. It is the subject of a review currently being undertaken by the Public Record Office and Property Holdings. The review is expected to be completed by 30 September 1994. If my hon. Friend wishes to give me the benefit of his thoughts, I shall be very grateful.

§ Mr. Maclennan
If a member of the public searched any part of the PRO, would he find a precedent—since the English revolution of 1688—for the monstrous and unconstitutional pressure put by the Lord Chancellor on Mr. Justice Wood, the president of the employment appeals tribunal, to violate his judicial oath and deny appellants an oral hearing in order, in his own words, to save the taxpayer costs?

Mr. Taylor
It is no part of my job to respond on judicial matters from the Dispatch Box; but I happen to think that if the hon. Gentleman were fully appraised of the facts, he would not have expressed himself in that way.

§ Mr. Boateng
It is, however, part of the Minister's job to respond to questions relating to the Public Record Office itself. Will he confirm that the review that he mentioned in reply to the question from the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) includes inquiries with the intention of imposing a charge on use of the PRO? Does he not accept that his role, and that of the Lord Chancellor, is to protect ease of access and freedom of use? Are we not witnessing—in terms of the development of the PRO—not the next step, but the final step to privatisation?

Mr. Taylor
There are no current plans to privatise the PRO. As for charging the public, the question of charges for access to the records is the subject of a review currently being undertaken by the PRO. An extensive market research exercise asking for the views of users has been carried out. The review is expected to be completed by 31 March; so the hon. Gentleman and the rest of the House will not have long to wait.