I am afraid you are wrong. The end column was not redacted by the General Register Office but by The National Archives who had the records after they were transferred to them and following the decision by the Information Commissioner. The end column for all of the schedules were redacted whether they had information or not, it would have been sdifficult to look at every schedule. Whilst this might seem to be unfair especially for individuals who were over 100 years old it is better than not having the records closed until 2012 and there was a statement by The National Archives to explain this. Had ancestry waited a few months they would have had the complete schedules!.
Yes, of course it was the National Archives, I must be losing my memory.
However that does not alter the essence of the posting. The IC's decision was that none of the information should be automatically redacted, but that each request was looked at separately and judged on its merits.
"54. The Commissioner concludes by emphasising that each request for 1911 census
information must be treated separately on its merits.
The National Archives will
need to consider the substance of the information which has been requested in
each case, will need to review what is stated on the face of the relevant census
schedule and may need to make further enquires." (My underlining)
The decision to redact the entire column has cost the hosting companies quite large sums of money which has in turn been passed on to their subscribers.
I didn't contest the redacting as I had already been informed that the infirmity column was back for number 12, High Street, Bottesford, the address I had chosen to base my claim on.
I did however advise others not to accept the blanket redacting.