Playing devils advocate here..
It's clear that someone's not being completely forthcoming with the truth on this, and personally if I was working at the HO and someone submitted a freedom of information act request for data - I'd probably only give out the information that had been officially released. The person answering the request probably won't be privy to any spoken conversations and will send the request over to the person they think might have the information.
The completeness of their answer will depend on them. So what I'm saying is, you can't always trust that a freedom of information act request for information will always give you all the information. I work for a government department (not the Home Office) and I've had freedom of information act requests forwarded on to me for my comments - so I know that you don't always go above and beyond what's been written down and officially recorded.
I'd hope that the reason for someone not being completely forthcoming with the truth was in the interests of the sport and not purely in the interests of the bottom line on someone's balance sheet. I suspect that the idea was sold as something that was in the interests of airgunners, but there was also an element of profit involved in there somewhere.
We are where we are though.. so what can we do?.. well, I'd say one thing would be to boycott buying guns with AT fitted if you can (not always the best option if you're lusting after a new gun), failing that if you know how to remove AT, help people to remove it (if you think their motives are genuine and not just some idiot trying to wind the power up), to that end, it's probably not a good idea to post up a how to guide on an open forum and keep it to email or PM.
Just get a springer