PN, that is a classic example of the most bizarre part of the legislation. The answer does not have to be truthful.
Initially, when MoD answered questions, they would include a statement outlining what to do if you thought the answer contained;
1. Errors of fact
2. Subjective comments
3. Opinion or comment based on factually incorrect information
However, once the Information Commissioner ruled there was no need to do this, they stopped.
In many ways this worked against MoD, because one way round it is to have more than one person submit precisely the same question. MoD "classifies" the originator and will have different parts of MoD answer the question depending on ones status. The best example is the Mull of Kintyre case, when D/ Air Staffs lied to a family member, but a Sqn Ldr at Yeovilton provided a truthful answer to the same question when submitted by a member of the public. The information he provided formed the basis of the evidence that cleared the pilots.