Internal audit report reveals failures in arms deal offsets |
Publication |
defenceWeb |
Date | 2014-02-14 |
Reporter | Kim Helfrich |
Web link | www.defenceweb.co.za |
With former Trade and Industry Minister Alec
Erwin set to appear before the Seriti
Commission before month-end, the acquisition
of a “devastating internal audit report” on
arms deal offsets could not have been better
timed.
The report, titled “Strategic Defence
Packages Performance Review Report” together
with a final audit report, was tabled in
Parliament by Rob Davies, current Trade and
Industry Minister, after what opposition
Democratic Alliance (DA) party shadow
defence and military veterans minister David
Maynier termed “a four month political
battle to crowbar the report out of the
department”.
The internal audit now in Maynier’s
possession audited 40 of 121 arms deal
offset projects and found, among others,
some companies obtained more credits
compared to investments and sales created or
caused by them.
He said the audit could not verify the total
number of jobs created or whether they were
sustainable. It also states economic growth,
access to new markets, establishing new
trading partners and technology transfers
could not be determined.
“The findings of the internal audit report
are particularly devastating when it comes
to job creation. One of the primary
justifications for the arms deal was that it
would create jobs.
“However, the internal audit finds: some
arms deal offset projects did not include an
obligation to deliver on job creation; the
actual contribution of some arms deal offset
projects were not described in terms of
sustaining existing jobs or creating new
jobs; baseline employment figures were not
provided at the beginning of some arms deal
offset projects so as to be able to
determine whether additional jobs were
created; and evidence of jobs created, in
some arms deal offset projects, was simply
not collected.
“In fact, of the 40 business plans audited,
only 24 included estimates of the number of
jobs to be created,” Maynier said.
Offsets related to the arms deal only
generated 26 000 direct jobs in ten years,
instead of the 65 000 opportunities promised
when the acquisitions were first mooted in
1999, according to the National Industrial
Participation Programme’s (NIPP) Performance
Review 2009. This means that arms deal
contractors only created 40% of the jobs
they committed to.
Offsets were required investments in
industry in South Africa and were a
condition of winning contracts under the
Strategic Defence Procurement Package.
Companies had Defence Industrial
Participation Programme (DIPP) and National
Industrial Participation Programme (NIPP)
obligations. NIPP activities were documented
and monitored by the Department of Trade and
Industry (DTI) while Armscor approved and
documented all DIPP projects. In order to
encourage investment in certain sectors,
multipliers were added to some investments.
For example, for the National Industrial
Participation Programme (NIPP) offsets, BAE
Systems and Saab invested $8 870 968 in
Denel, partly acquiring Denel Aerostructures.
After an investment multiplier of 67.4 was
applied, the two companies were credited
with $1 704 936 013 worth of investment.
“The arms deal was supposed to generate
roughly R110 billion in investments and 65
000 jobs,” said Maynier in 2012. “However,
the figures revealed…show that the arms deal
actually generated roughly R6 billion in
actual investment and 13 690 new jobs.”
These figures, however, exclude indirect
jobs and jobs saved.
Meanwhile, a statement on the Arms
Procurement Commission website indicates
Erwin “will present evidence concerning the
nature and scope of the mandate of the
Inter-Ministerial Committee (established to
oversee the Strategic Defence Procurement
Packages [SDPP]), South Africa’s economic
and National Industrial Policy (NIP) and its
application through the National Industrial
Participation Programme (NIPP) as it related
to the SDPP, including dealing with the
allocation of credits and the use of
multipliers and address the role of the
International Offers Negotiating Committee (IONT),
inclusively.
“Finally he will give a brief summary of the
rationale for and the benefits that were
realised with regard to the various aspects
of the projects undertaken.”
Read More
With acknowledgement to Kim
Helfrich
and defenceWeb.
IP was a special purpose
vehicle designed to extract money out of the
local taxpayers, pay it to the foreign
equipment suppliers (the "Obligors") and for
them to then inject that money back to
locals, but this time specifically into the
local and foreign bank accounts of the usual
suspects making up the decision-making cadre
and their kin.
This is a simple case of grand larceny
called round robbing.
Meanwhile the Obligors made their cuts out
of winning their bids against their
opposition with much higher prices, lower
quality and less quantity.
Come on Admirals, Poets and other SDP
Gentry, tell me it ain't so.
The Jintleman Litigant
For the measly 13 690 jobs
that the SDP NIP gave us (if it was indeed
that high), the SDPs effectively broke
forever the South African Defence Industry
that used to employ over 200 000 jobs and
with a slight bit of forethought, planning
and support could have been sustained
forever.
But instead Mandela, Mbeki, Erwin, Modise,
Manuel, Radebe, et cie sacrificed this
golden goose on the alters of avarice,
gluttony, greed, conspicuous consumption and
dynasty construction.
Come on Admirals, Poets and other SDP
Gentry, stump up.