---

Business of the House

Ms Harman: I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon-he is right that it was a written ministerial statement. I think I remember that that statement contained the information that there were something like 16,000 routine FOI requests, of which only two have been vetoed, so it was a very exceptional occurrence, which is why things were spelt out in a written ministerial statement. The framework that is set down by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was followed as part of that process. [Official Report, 7 January 2010, Vol. 503, c. 286.] Letter of correction from Ms Harman: An error has been identified in the oral answer given to the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) during Business Questions on 7 January 2010. The full answer given was as follows: Mr. Heath: A written statement. Ms Harman: I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon-he is right that it was a written ministerial statement. I think I remember that that statement contained the information that there were something like 16,000 routine FOI requests, of which only two have been vetoed, so it was a very exceptional occurrence, which is why things were spelt out in a written ministerial statement. The framework that is set down by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was followed as part of that process. The correct answer should have been: Ms Harman: I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon-he is right that it was a written ministerial statement. I think I remember that that statement contained the information that there were something like 160,000 non-routine FOI requests, of which only two have been vetoed, so it was a very exceptional occurrence, which is why things were spelt out in a written ministerial statement. The framework that is set down by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was followed as part of that process