In a new bombshell over South Africa's multi-billion-rand arms deal, it has emerged that the government paid more than double for its Hawker/Grippen (sic - Gripen) fighter trainer jets, which cost R10 billion *1, than the price of Italian jets preferred by defence force experts.

It has also come to light that retired defence secretary Lieutenant General Pierre Steyn expressed his concern over the legitimacy of the deal to investigators as far back as 2001 and claimed that it seemed as if the winning bidders for the supply of the aircraft had been decided beforehand.

This week, opposition members of parliament demanded to be allowed to hear Steyn's views for themselves, claiming his criticisms of the acquisition process had been given short shrift in the final report on an investigation into whether there were irregularities in the procurement.

Among the new evidence, which the Democratic Alliance says supports the notion that material changes were made to the joint investigating team's draft report, is an interview with Steyn conducted by investigators in 2001.

Full details of the interview had until now not been disclosed, but Sunday Argus has obtained a full transcript: in the course of 56 pages, Steyn repeatedly expresses strong criticism of the process leading to the government's decision to favour the Hawk/Grippen aircraft.

Italy's MB339FB jet originally scored highest when offers from international aeronautics companies were considered by the South African Air Force in 1998. But, in the end, the significantly more expensive Hawk 100, produced by British multinational BAe Systems, won the tender.

Steyn makes it clear in the interview that he felt a decision on who should supply the aircraft had been made in advance - before the series of meetings to discuss the issue were held, and that these meetings amounted to little more than a "facade of legitimisation".

Steyn told the interviewers he was instructed by the minister of defence at the time, Joe Modise, to leave out the question of how much the various aircraft cost. Steyn said it appeared the system of evaluating the different options had been "manipulated".

"It is irregular. How on earth do you convince the general public that you will acquire an expensive system and damn the cost?" Steyn said.

"The decision makers and those who supported (them) tried various avenues to get to, presumably, their predetermined choice.

"Their choice was patently clear right from the start."

Referring to a meeting of the aircraft acquisition committee, Steyn said: "It was a watershed meeting because at that stage it was clear to most of us that the preferred choice of the minister, and those who supported him would cost almost double that of the (Italian) MB 339FB.

"One would expect a consideration that if your cost doubles, and the improvement of performance is a mere 15 %, (it) would not be responsible if such a decision was carried."

Steyn said the chief of acquisitions during the deal, Chippy Shaik, reported directly to the minister on the arms package deal.

"The chief of acquisitions is compelled to report to the defence secretary. However it became apparent in the conduct of this weapon package initiative that the minister wanted him to report to him directly, which he did," Steyn said.

Steyn told the interviewers that, as accounting officer, his key concern was that the decision to acquire arms was being taken without the defence force being certain that there would be sufficient money not only to buy, but to operate equipment in the years ahead.

"Certainly the capital expenditure is important from a once-off point of view, but sustaining the acquisition in future years by dissecting all the possible implications from the operational or personnel point of view is vitally important. This was not done."

"My major concern was that these various committees were required to consider an acquisition plan without the prescripts of feasibility studies and project studies being thoroughly conducted."

Steyn told the interviewers that when he expressed concern about budgeting for the new equipment he was told by Modise that this would be dealt with via offset investments in local defence and other industries by companies associated with the winning bidders.

During the interview Steyn repeatedly claimed that the process of acquiring the aircraft was rushed.

"If you are tempted to select the solution ahead of stating your requirements your temptation will continue and you will be writing requirements meeting your specifications or meeting your choice."

"I submit that we started erring in that direction, the whole process was turned arse about face and I was irritated no end at going through a facade of legitimising what we were doing," Steyn said.

Referring to an ad hoc meeting which is central to a dispute over whether or not it was agreed to opt for the Hawk/Grippen, Steyn said he disputed that this decision was made but it was possibly made after he left.

Steyn subsequently queried minutes presented by Shaik and said the meeting had decided to make the choice between the Hawk and the MB339 at cabinet level.

Attempts to reach Steyn this week to get more details about the 2001 interview were unsuccessful.

With acknowledgements to Chiara Carter and the Sunday Times.

*1 Together the Hawk and Gripen cost about R16 billion (R15,916 billion to be exact) in 1998 Rands. Cleverly the contract price was nor split, because the Hawk had to come with the Gripen and Gripen with the Hawk - even though the Hawk was a British BAE Systems products while the Gripen was a Swedish Saab product.

But it is estimated that the Gripens costs about R10 billion and the Hawks about R6 billion.

In today's value of money and remembering that we will only take delivery of the Hawks in the next 5 years and the Gripens in the next 10 years, the Gripens are costing us about R20 billion and the Hawks about R12 billion.

This is quite different to the case of buying a house or a car on HP because in those cases one gets use of the items the instant that the downpayment is made.

By the time that the Gripens are delivered and certified to be operational one can be reasonably sure that they will have cost at least R60 billion in 2016 Rands.

By the time the Hawks are delivered and are certified operational in 2010 one can be reasonably sure that they will have cost at least R16 billion in 2010 Rands.

The Hawk is a 35 year old aircraft design.

The Gripen is a 4th generation ultra-sophisticated light fighter jet designed for Scandanavian operations with short combat range (800 km), in-flight refuelling and first world logistic support concepts using sophisticated built-in and peculiar support equipment (PSE) as well as line replaceable units (LRUs).

The Cheetah C 3rd generation jet fighter, 38 of which were taken into service by the SAAF in 1997, has a combat range in the region of 1 200 km.

But it all makes sense, Sweden and Scandanavia are really small places, whereas in the SAAF's sphere of operations it is about 1 200 from Cape Town to Pretoria, 800 from Pretoria to Musina, about 1 200 km from Musina to Lusaka, about 1 200 from Pretoria to Windhoek - alles is net baie ver.