Blair defends dropping of BAE-Saudi probe
Prime Minister Tony Blair defended the dropping of a fraud probe into BAE Systems' weapons deals with Saudi Arabia, insisting it would have been "devastating" for Britain's interests to continue.
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) last month stopped an investigation into claims that giant British defence firm BAE established a slush fund for some members of the Saudi royal family.
The fund allegedly provided perks including luxury cars while the company attempted to secure a contract in the 1980s.
Blair advised Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith that to continue would have been against Britain's national interest. The investigation into the Al-Yamamah BAE Systems deal from the 1980s was stopped after two years.
"There is no doubt whatever in my mind, and I think of those of any of the people who have looked at this issue, that had we proceeded with this, the result would have been devastating for our relationship with an important country with whom we cooperate closely on terrorism, on security, on the Middle East peace process and a host of other issues," Blair said.
"And that is leaving aside the thousands of jobs that we would have lost, which is not the consideration in this case, but nonetheless I'll just point it out."
BAE last year secured a 10-billion-pound (15.2-billion-euro, 19.6-billion-dollar) deal with Saudi Arabia for 72 Eurofighter jets, and the deal was reportedly under threat due to the SFO investigation.
"I may be wrong but this is my view," Blair told reporters during his monthly news conference at his Downing Street office.
He said the investigation would have significantly damaged a major strategic partnership just at the moment when it was of vital importance.
Responding to suggestions that Britain did not need the Saudis as much as Riyadh needed London on counter-terrorism, Blair said: "It's not the information I've got".
"I've got to take a judgement about the national interest and that's my job. I know I would be heavily criticised for it but I believe it to be the right judgement."
Blair said it was the soundly-based judgement of "our entire system".
The Foreign Office said later Tuesday that Britain's overseas intelligence agency MI6 did share government concerns about the investigation and the "possible consequences for the public interest".
The Guardian newspaper had said Tuesday that MI6 disputed the argument that national security was at risk and that MI5, the country's domestic spy agency, had no evidence the Saudis would sever its security links with Britain.
Meanwhile officials from the SFO and Goldsmith's office faced a group of anti-bribery experts from the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to explain why the probe had been halted.
Britain is suspected of having violated Article 5 of the OECD anti-bribery convention, to which it is a signatory.
It states that bribery probes "shall not be influenced by considerations of national economic interest, the potential effect upon relations with another state or the identity of the natural or legal persons involved".
"The members of the working group are not here to sit in judgement, but rather to assess the extent to which the UK's actions are in compliance with the convention," an OECD spokesman explained Tuesday.
The OECD said that Britain had completed amending its laws to comply with the convention in February 2002.
"In the case of any follow up, they (the anti-bribery panel) may well re-examine the legal dispositions in Britain. Are they in fact as strong as we thought they were?" the spokesman said.
The panel would make "some kind of statement" at the end of the meeting on Thursday and suggested a final judgement could be made public in March when Britain's anti-corruption measures were set for a broad review, he added
AFP
