Cape Town - "Improper influence" was "probably" exerted in the government's choice of primary and secondary weapon suppliers in compiling the government's controversial arms procurement package.The public accounts standing committee on Monday came to this conclusion in a preliminary report recommending the government should conduct an "independent and expert forensic probe" into all aspects of the weapons package. The Auditor General earlier in his probe recommended that he conduct a forensic probe. 

National Director for Public Prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka has also asked to be involved in the investigation. The "lax regulations" in instances where civil servants experienced conflicting interests, were unacceptable, said ANC MP Andrew Feinstein. The standing committee could not say whether certain contracts were in jeopardy as a result of irregularities. The contracts stipulate that South Africa can withdraw in the event of irregularities. Cabinet Should Have Warned of More Costs The committee regards estimates of 65 000 new job opportunities as "adventurous" and "opportunistic".

The committee also criticised the cabinet for not "informing the public of the possibilities of cost escalations. "The documentation which provided the basis upon which the government reached its ultimate decision, revealed that the cabinet had been fully informed in order to make the public aware of the possibility of increased costs." The  cabinet, in its initial announcement of the arms package last year, "let slip" that further substantial cost implications could be expected.

The purchase sum was adjusted over the past year from R29.9 billion to R30.3 billion to R43.8 billion. Despite the cabinet's assurance last week that the requirements for the package had been structured so as to exclude cost increases, the committee still expressed its concerns that the costs could rise above the stated R43.8  billion.

Interest obligations associated with the loans had not been calculated into that sum. The standing committee expressed anxiety over the "realism" of macro-economic assumptions by the treasury department and movements within the big currency markets and wants to meet with the finance minister to  discuss the issue. The committee would also gather more information to ensure that the price of  the Grippen and Hawk aircraft  had not been "weighted".

The fines stipulated for weapons suppliers who did not honour their investment commitments in terms of the weapons package (10% of the cash price for national industrial participation projects), was cause for great concern since the supplier then paid a "relatively modest" sum and was excused from counter-trade obligations. 

The committee also feared that with the recovery in the international weapons market, suppliers might not honour their obligations. The "complicated and overlapping" nature of the issues to be probed, required  participation by the Auditor General, the Public Prosecutor, the Heath Special Investigative Unit and the Investigating Directorate for Serious Economic Offences, the committee recommended. The committee insisted on half-yearly reports detailing the substantiation of commitments. The government should "pursue this aspect actively".

With acknowledgement to Christi van der Westhuizen and the Beeld.