State not Liable for Arms Subcontracts |
Publication | Business Day |
Date | 2001-02-27 |
Reporter | Wyndham Hartley |
Web Link | www.bday.co.za |
CAPE TOWN The three senior cabinet ministers most involved with the multibillion-rand arms deal distanced themselves and government from the deal's subcontracts yesterday, saying there was "no way" government could have accepted responsibility for them.
The three Finance Minister Trevor Manuel, Trade and Industry Minister Alec Erwin and Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota explained to Parliament's public accounts committee that for government to have taken responsibility for the subcontracts would have meant the state would then not have been able to hold the primary contractors liable for the quality of products they undertook to supply.
The risk of a faulty product would then have been carried by the state.
It was concern about the way the subcontracts were handled which caused auditor-general Shauket Fakie to recommend last year in his report on the review of the arms deal that a forensic audit of subcontracts was needed. The committee also has expressed misgivings that conflicts of interest which could have led to corruption were likely to be located in the subcontracts.
Erwin said: "I have to stress again and again we are not prepared to take responsibility for subcontracts. How the primary contractor and the subcontractor got together is their business."
He said if there were attempts by officials to manipulate the way primary contractors awarded the subcontracts, that was for the auditor-general's forensic investigation to determine. He said the allegations which had been made about the subcontracts had to be taken into account by the investigation.
Manuel said the moment government accepted responsibility for subcontracts, all the risk of the product failing would have to be borne by the state, not the primary contractor.
Erwin acknowledged there had been contact between officials and potential subcontractors over decisions about compliance over specifications required by the defence department.
He stressed that government accepted without question the auditorgeneral's constitutional responsibility to investigate, and repeated the assurance that government was co-operating fully with the investigation.
The three ministers were appearing before the committee to explain their vigorous criticism of the committee's recent report on the arms deal.
The declared point of departure of the report that arms deals were corrupt prejudged the deal over which the ministers had presided and they took exception to it, Erwin said.
With acknowledgement to Business Day and Wyndham Hartley.