The government has wasted at least £125m on cancelled IT projects in the past five years, according to a series of parliamentary questions from the Conservative Party.

The amount does not include overspend on existing projects, but money spent on projects that have subsequently been scrapped.

Three major core IT projects have been terminated at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: the £12.6m Catalyst Project designed to provide a records management system; the £4m Phoenix system meant to handle licences for protected species covered by international conventions; and a £9.6m customer information programme.

Three projects at the Department for Work and Pensions have also been cancelled, including a £1.4m document management system, an £11.2m retirement planner and a £143m Benefits Processing Replacement Programme, although £73m of this has been of value to the department through another scheme.

A £4.3m National Enforcement Tracker System project at the Ministry of Justice was cancelled in August 2007 following a detailed review which highlighted that the cost and scope of the project no longer provided value for money.

The Cabinet Office initiated one major IT project that was cancelled prior to completion. The £83m contract for a data centre and managed hosting service was terminated because of supplier problems, although only £5m was paid to suppler ITNET.

The Department for Transport cancelled four projects in the past five years worth £9.2m including £7.9m on the DVLA's Tracking Vehicles Through the Trade system.

The Department of Communities and Local Government spent £1.06m on a Housing and Employment Mobility Services Agreement that was terminated.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and the Department for Northern Ireland cancelled no projects.

The Department for Children Schools and Families, the Department for Innovation Universties and Skills, the Department of Health and the Scotland Office would not reply to the parliamentary questions, citing cost issues.