If this country is finally to come to terms with the issues surrounding the arms procurement package, the parliamentary response to last week's report by the three investigative agencies is going to be crucial. And let there be no illusions. What is at stake here is the country's reputation for good governance and, consequently, its desirability as an investment destination for the offset programmes and beyond, prospects for the currency and our international image generally.

Any politician who professes to care about these things has to acknowledge a few home truths. Avoiding further damage to the national interest will require an honest assessment of the report's contents and findings.

The national interest will not be served by opposition parties intent on using the report to score shallow political points for shortterm gain. But nor will it be served by evasion and attempts at suppression of debate by the ruling party. So far, the omens are not auspicious.

The Democratic Party's walkout from Parliament when the report was presented last Thursday made the official opposition look no better than a group of sulking kindergarten pupils. It is certainly arguable that the report's initial presentation was carefully stage managed. But there are less melodramatic ways of making the point. Besides, the real issue is the substance of the report.

Similarly, Pan Africanist Congress MP Patricia de Lille for all the credit she deserves for pressing for a proper investigation has often been reckless, not least with her kneejerk description of the report on Thursday as a "whitewash" before she had even read it.

None of this is conducive to a rational debate. But nor is President Thabo Mbeki's facile assertion that anyone asking questions is doing so out of racist motives. It is hardly a way of encouraging MPs of his own party to carry out their oversight functions with integrity.

And let us be clear why it is necessary that a thorough job be done in this regard. It is because it is the priceless opportunity for government to restore the credibility of the deal. Government's poor management of this saga from the exclusion of the special investigating unit to the clipping of the wings of the special committee on public accounts (Scopa) has made it necessary for the investigators to defend their own credentials. Any hint of attempts to finesse the report through the seven assigned portfolio committees, of which Scopa is the prime one, will signal to the world that a cover up is in progress, which is bad for SA politics.

Many loose ends require further oversight, from individual officials' cases to the report's disputable conclusion that costing models used by cabinet were "adequate under the circumstances". A thorough airing of these, with the opposition doing an honest job, will do SA's reputation for good governance a lot of good. Failure will do untold damage.

With acknowledgement to Business Day.