ES News email The latest headlines in your inbox twice a day Monday - Friday plus breaking news updates Enter your email address Continue Please enter an email address Email address is invalid Fill out this field Email address is invalid You already have an account. Please log in Register with your social account or click here to log in I would like to receive lunchtime headlines Monday - Friday plus breaking news alerts, by email Update newsletter preferences

House of Commons speaker John Bercow has been accused of suppressing reports that reveal the scale of MPs' alcohol problems.

The Speaker has invoked a controversial loophole in the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act to withhold material thought to raise concerns about the extent of drinking in Westminster's subsidised bars.

There are around a dozen bars and restaurants on the estate serving politicians, staff and other passholders, and the taxpayer subsidy of about £4 million a year means a pint of beer costs as little as £2.90.

The FOI request was submitted by the Press Association, following a series of incidents that highlighted the issue of heavy drinking at parliament.

Former MP Eric Joyce was convicted of assaulting a fellow politician during a brawl in Strangers' Bar in 2012, while another ex-member, Mark Reckless, confessed to missing a late-night parliamentary vote in 2010 because he was too drunk.

Dr Sarah Wollaston, Totnes MP and now health select committee chairwoman, warned in 2011 that some of her colleagues were drinking "really quite heavily".

She said: "Who would go to see a surgeon who had just drunk a bottle of wine at lunchtime? But we fully accept that MPs are perfectly capable of performing as MPs despite some of them drinking really quite heavily."

Commons bar staff have previously been given extra training on how to refuse to serve drunk customers, and told to top up glasses less frequently at functions.

Charity Alcohol Concern has urged parliament to remove subsidies from alcohol sold in its bars and restaurants.

The House authorities are believed to have conducted work to establish the extent of drinking problems and consider ways they could be addressed.

The FOI request, which sought to obtain evidence or reports on "the provision and consumption of alcohol on the parliamentary estate, and related health effects", was turned down after Mr Bercow said releasing the information "would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice."

The response from Parliament said: "The Speaker of the House of Commons has formed the reasonable opinion, under the above sections of the Act, that disclosure of this information would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice and the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation."

The only information the House did disclose was that nine appointments were made with Parliament's Health and Wellbeing Service over "alcohol dependency" in September 2012, and none the following month.

The House of Commons is the only public body that can use the exemption without demonstrating that the public interest is weighted against releasing the information.

The same loophole was used three years ago to avoid revealing details of Mr Bercow's tax bill for his grace-and-favour residence, which had been requested under FOI by the Press Association.

Maurice Frankel, director of the Campaign for Freedom of Information, said Mr Bercow appeared to be "avoiding scrutiny" to prevent damage to the reputation of MPs.

"He is exploiting a loophole in the FOI Act which parliament itself has inserted to protect parliament from scrutiny," he said.

"On the face of it there is no reason why they should not reveal what their assessment of any alcohol problem in parliament is.

"It is a matter of public interest if any MP's or peer's conduct is being impaired.

"It is entirely reasonable for us to know whether they regard that as a problem, and what has been considered.

"It is extremely easy for parliament to avoid scrutiny under the FOI Act."