Exaro News Archive Secret memo puts MoD in frame over Saudi bribery...

Secret memo puts MoD in frame over Saudi bribery claims


Secret memo puts MoD in frame over Saudi bribery claims

MoD chiefs allowed 10% ‘agency fees’ in huge Saudi military-communications deal

By Frederika Whitehead | 26 June 2012

Secret memo puts MoD in frame over Saudi bribery claimsBritain’s Ministry of Defence faces calls to explain what it knew and when about irregular payments linked to a huge defence deal with Saudi Arabia.

A secret memo written 36 years ago shows that top officials at the Ministry of Defence (MoD) approved payments of “agency fees” to help clinch a government-to-government contract to overhaul the Saudi national guard’s communications systems.

It also reveals that the MoD regarded such payments as unnecessary when buying from the defence industry for UK armed forces, raising questions over the purpose of such “agency fees”.

The memo even shows that a Cayman-registered company at the centre of bribery allegations today was lined up back in 1976 to receive “agency fees”.

Exaro’s latest disclosures on the Saudi communications contract has prompted a senior Liberal Democrat MP, Malcolm Bruce, to join the shadow attorney general, Emily Thornberry, in calling on ministers to allow the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to press ahead with a full investigation into the deal.

The key memo was written during talks in 1976 about the deal, known as the Sangcom project, between Saudi Arabia and Jim Callaghan’s Labour government.

It was a response to a directive written by the late Sir Frank Cooper, then the MoD’s permanent secretary.

Sir Lester Suffield, the most senior civil servant at the MoD unit responsible at the time for promoting UK defence sales overseas, told Cooper that Sangcom – worth £150 million then – provided for “agency fees” of 15 per cent. The project later expanded hugely.

Suffield, then head of the MoD’s Defence Sales Organisation, wrote that “the fees being demanded” are not “exceptionally large in terms of the per-centages commonly charged in Saudi Arabia.”

“In absolute terms, the sums involved are very large,” he said.

“I have discarded as unthinkable the possible option of informing the Saudis that we have decided not to proceed.”

The proposed fees should be treated as “legitimate charges to the projects” or curtailed, but without “reducing them to a level that would permit the French, or others, easily to outbid us.”

Suffield, who died in 1999, recommended approving “agency fees” of 10 per cent and allowing the project’s prime contractor to increase its profit margin to accommodate other charges, to a level that would not be allowed for sales to the UK government.

He wrote: “I would also recommend that the profit margins allowed on projects of this nature be significantly more generous than on contracts for the supply of equipment or services to HMG.”

“I do not believe that there is anything in the argument that an increase in the profit margin on overseas projects would lead contractors to expect similar treatment on a British contract. Were they to do so, their claims could be very easily withstood.”

Cooper accepted Suffield’s recommendations.

The documents were accidentally declassified and released in 2006 to the National Archives, where they were discovered by Nicholas Gilby, a researcher for the Campaign Against Arms Trade.

At the time, the media focussed on the MoD’s general acceptance of “agency fees” in Saudi defence deals, but the significance of the Sangcom references has only become clear since an Exaro investigation revealed details of transfers totalling just over £14.5 million linked to the deal and paid to two mysterious companies in the Cayman Islands between 2007 and 2010.

Exaro also revealed that MoD officials were alarmed by the offshore payments in late 2008, but allowed the transfers to continue.

The declassified memos prompted the late Lord Gilmour, Conservative defence secretary in 1974, to say: “You either got the business and bribed, or you didn’t bribe and didn’t get the business.”

Malcolm Bruce, a Liberal Democrat MP on the arms export controls committee, told Exaro: “It would be extremely damaging if the government intervened to stop any further investigation in the light of this new information. The SFO must be free to pursue its investigation and take whatever further action is necessary, including prosecution if there is any serious prospect of a conviction.”

An MoD spokesman said: “Certain commercial arrangements relating to the Sangcom programme are commercial-in-confidence and, as such, it is not appropriate to expand on these matters.”

Its prime contractor denies any wrongdoing.

Related Stories

Sarah Davies
Sarah Davieshttps://www.exaronews.com/
Exaro News investigates matters of public interest and seeks to uncover the truth.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest news



Man shot in the head on his way home from work, then victimized by Monroe County Sheriffs

In this episode Shawn Ryan sits down with Don Bradley A.K.A. Head Shot Don, who is a former Green...

Huge spike in coronavirus infections and deaths

There was a huge spike in confirmed coronavirus infections today, along with a significant spike in deaths. Total Confirmed Cases:...

Six-year-old kids armed and trained to fight Mexican drug cartels

A child militia in Mexico’s southwestern state of Guerrero is training boys, some as young as 6, to serve...

Canadians Targeted in Debit Card Fraud, Check Your Bank Statements

A number of Canadians have been affected by debit card fraud in the past 30-days despite never having used...

Marshall County Man Convicted of Federal Cyberstalking and Gun Crime

A Marshall County man was convicted Thursday afternoon of cyberstalking as well as a federal gun violation following a...

Must read

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you