SFO raids four premises in BAE contracts probe
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South of the ex-North Devon flying club. North of Isca.
Age: 49
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You seem to forget that JP233 was desingned as a cold war asset and just like most of the weaponary for that era, it wasn't envisaged that the aircraft would be coming back for a second run. Just give the boys of BAOR a chance to get out into the weeds before the Fitters, Fencers, Frogfoots and Floggers gave them the good news.
You also seem to forget that a major amount of tornado GR crashes, German, Italian and Brit have been pronounced as CFIT by their BoIs over the airframes life. Hence the rise of the joke (Fairly bad taste) in the early to mid 80's "Why don't german farmers plough their fields?.... They're waiting for the RAF/Luftwaffe to do it for them"
On a lighter note (and back on topic) what did people actually think of tonights panorama?
You also seem to forget that a major amount of tornado GR crashes, German, Italian and Brit have been pronounced as CFIT by their BoIs over the airframes life. Hence the rise of the joke (Fairly bad taste) in the early to mid 80's "Why don't german farmers plough their fields?.... They're waiting for the RAF/Luftwaffe to do it for them"
On a lighter note (and back on topic) what did people actually think of tonights panorama?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what did people actually think of tonights panorama?
Did that woman actually do any research of her own or just read the Guardian archive?
The MTV video effects were one thing, then when plane-spotters were being used as evidence of where Prince Bandar's plane had been, all credibility leapt overboard and the ship sank.
Nothing new was presented, as far as I am concerned, no conclusions were reached. And the insufferably arrogant comment at the end refering to "if you are an arms dealer, just get government backing for any bribes," well that deserves no place in objective investigation whatsoever.
I want my licence fee back if that is the ****e the BBC are spewing out.
"Next week, what happens if we take TV away from kids." Perhaps they grow up to be Panorama "investigators."
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fluffy
Well, fine if you regard aircraft & crew as a very expensive cruise missile.
I know certain missions especially in earlier & Nimrod days were acknowledged as near suicide missions - but in relatively modern times, when not talking of nukes, it would be jolly handy to have the aircraft & crew back again - if being really brutal, for the numbers game.
My point is, the weapon did not do it's job - and if the BOI's ( such a reliable source ! ) reckoned most were CFIT, where was the vaunted hands off TFR " here I come " & other later kit exactly helping ?
I know certain missions especially in earlier & Nimrod days were acknowledged as near suicide missions - but in relatively modern times, when not talking of nukes, it would be jolly handy to have the aircraft & crew back again - if being really brutal, for the numbers game.
My point is, the weapon did not do it's job - and if the BOI's ( such a reliable source ! ) reckoned most were CFIT, where was the vaunted hands off TFR " here I come " & other later kit exactly helping ?
Yet another waste of 30 minutes of my life!
As a self-confessed journo, I normally resist the temptation to leap at the bait frequently dangled in front of me by PPRuNers. But I’ve also been in aviation, mostly but not exclusively military, all my adult life, and I’m afraid I can’t resist a quick harrumph at eal401.
Eal’s remarks about Monday’s Panorama reveal a shocking implicit arrogance.
Eal chooses to denigrate plane-spotters. In fact, in the absence of credible official information on aircraft movements, their evidence is usually accurate and often uniquely helpful.
I gather eal doesn’t like The Guardian, but, whether you like its political stance or not, its reputation for investigative journalism is up amongst the best. Eal obviously doesn’t like the BBC either, but Panorama used to be in the same investigative league. Although it has significantly dumbed-down as part of the price for getting back into weekday primetime (instead of being hidden in the Sunday evening graveyard), it is still able to find and investigate worthwhile subjects, including Nimrod the week before. And ‘that woman’ is Jane Corbin, a courageous and extremely well thought of investigative journalist.
As for her final comment about getting government backing for bribes, that seems to be a reasonable conclusion from what she had demonstrated in the programme. As an ending to a programme, it was self-evidently comment, and not fact, and in my view, perfectly acceptable.
The odd previous post from eal suggests a connection with BAES, which might explain, if not excuse, his/her attitude. Whether or not that is the case, my view of his/her post is that it is meretricious claptrap.
Harrumph complete.
airsound
Eal’s remarks about Monday’s Panorama reveal a shocking implicit arrogance.
when plane-spotters were being used as evidence of where Prince Bandar's plane had been, all credibility leapt overboard and the ship sank.
Did that woman actually do any research of her own or just read the Guardian archive?
As for her final comment about getting government backing for bribes, that seems to be a reasonable conclusion from what she had demonstrated in the programme. As an ending to a programme, it was self-evidently comment, and not fact, and in my view, perfectly acceptable.
The odd previous post from eal suggests a connection with BAES, which might explain, if not excuse, his/her attitude. Whether or not that is the case, my view of his/her post is that it is meretricious claptrap.
Harrumph complete.
airsound
I'm a journo, too, and I've been writing full-time about aviation and aerospace for 23 years, and a little time before that as a part time freelance.
I'd agree with Airsound as to the occasional value of spotters, though there's is a hobby I find it hard to understand.
I would absolutely disagree as to the credibility of the Guardian in this case - the journalist concerned seems to have been running a pretty cynical and unscrupulous one man war against BAE (think of BEagle with a pen, and without the sense of fun).
And whatever Ms Corbin's merits, to front a Panorama whose primary focus was a military aircraft procurement, I would have though that some grasp of military aviation would have been a help. She had a great manner on camera as she compared the prices of RAF Tornados (£16m) and RSAF aircraft (£21m) and paraded herself between two badly made Airfix models and the Tornado in the RAF Museum. She took no account of the support/spares/weapons included in one price, the inflation which increased prices between one contract and the other, nor the fact that the RSAF proce was an average based on GR1s, 1As and F3s.
Moreover, the use of words like bribe is pretty emotive. Payments to middlemen and facillitators are routine in the Middle East, and these payments were authorised by the MoD, which makes them seem rather less sinister than 'slush fund payments' made under the table by some corrupt company.
I'd agree with Airsound as to the occasional value of spotters, though there's is a hobby I find it hard to understand.
I would absolutely disagree as to the credibility of the Guardian in this case - the journalist concerned seems to have been running a pretty cynical and unscrupulous one man war against BAE (think of BEagle with a pen, and without the sense of fun).
And whatever Ms Corbin's merits, to front a Panorama whose primary focus was a military aircraft procurement, I would have though that some grasp of military aviation would have been a help. She had a great manner on camera as she compared the prices of RAF Tornados (£16m) and RSAF aircraft (£21m) and paraded herself between two badly made Airfix models and the Tornado in the RAF Museum. She took no account of the support/spares/weapons included in one price, the inflation which increased prices between one contract and the other, nor the fact that the RSAF proce was an average based on GR1s, 1As and F3s.
Moreover, the use of words like bribe is pretty emotive. Payments to middlemen and facillitators are routine in the Middle East, and these payments were authorised by the MoD, which makes them seem rather less sinister than 'slush fund payments' made under the table by some corrupt company.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eal chooses to denigrate plane-spotters.
Eal obviously doesn’t like the BBC either
Jackonicko has done a better job of supporting his view than either you or me.
(My first thought on the price "comparison" was "what about the support." Very, very, very lax reporting, so called reputation or not)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Product Support
One thing I will stand up for BAe / Hawkers Dunsfold on - they did as I understand submit bids including the life & support or the aircraft - which I was told the U.S. did not.
We had a large team ( 100's ) of support people, always off somewhere.
I doubt such 'Rolls Royce' service survived the bean counter's mid-late 1990's era though.
We had a large team ( 100's ) of support people, always off somewhere.
I doubt such 'Rolls Royce' service survived the bean counter's mid-late 1990's era though.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom line in doing business with the Saudis is that you do it their way or not at all.
If you can persuade them that their old way is now illegal in this country, as has clearly been done already, and they still want to do business with us, we should not then rake over practises that were not, in any case, illegal at the time.
If the Typhoon deal is signed despite the best attempts of the BBC and Guardian et al to sabotage it (probably to the unbridled joy of the Americans and French) it will testify to the desirability of the product - not the way we conduct our affairs.
Let's get real!
If you can persuade them that their old way is now illegal in this country, as has clearly been done already, and they still want to do business with us, we should not then rake over practises that were not, in any case, illegal at the time.
If the Typhoon deal is signed despite the best attempts of the BBC and Guardian et al to sabotage it (probably to the unbridled joy of the Americans and French) it will testify to the desirability of the product - not the way we conduct our affairs.
Let's get real!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's assume the £16m and £21m were like for like? Who pays the difference?
It is really just international number moving.
My aeroplane will cost £1m. I will invoice your government for £1.1m. I will pay you a facilitator's fee of £100k. Your government has an aeroplane costing £1.1m - done deal.
Who pays the bribe? HMG - the tax payer, BAE - the shareholder? Or the country buying the aircraft?
Or did it go:
My aeroplane will cost £1m. I will invoice your government for £1m. I will pay you a facilitator's fee of £100k. Your government has an aeroplane costing £1m and my company has absorbed a £100k - done deal.
Who loses? HMG - the tax payer who refunded the discount to BAE, BAE who reduced the dividend to the shareholder, or the tax man as the discount was tax deductable? Or the country buying the aircraft?
It is really just international number moving.
My aeroplane will cost £1m. I will invoice your government for £1.1m. I will pay you a facilitator's fee of £100k. Your government has an aeroplane costing £1.1m - done deal.
Who pays the bribe? HMG - the tax payer, BAE - the shareholder? Or the country buying the aircraft?
Or did it go:
My aeroplane will cost £1m. I will invoice your government for £1m. I will pay you a facilitator's fee of £100k. Your government has an aeroplane costing £1m and my company has absorbed a £100k - done deal.
Who loses? HMG - the tax payer who refunded the discount to BAE, BAE who reduced the dividend to the shareholder, or the tax man as the discount was tax deductable? Or the country buying the aircraft?
Oh, I’m sorry, eal401, I must have completely misunderstood you. When you said
I believed you were denigrating planes-spotters - or at very least denigrating what they do, which, in the circumstances, is pretty much the same thing.
Silly old me.
Ditto for when you said
I thought you must mean that you didn’t like the BBC.
Can’t imagine how I can have been so wrong.
airsound
....when plane-spotters were being used as evidence of where Prince Bandar's plane had been, all credibility leapt overboard and the ship sank
Silly old me.
Ditto for when you said
I want my licence fee back if that is the ****e the BBC are spewing out.
Can’t imagine how I can have been so wrong.
airsound
Jacko, I’m inclined to agree with you when you say
Indeed, I have several times tried to persuade the BBC at least to use advisers who know about aviation when they’re doing aviation stories. They rarely do, possibly because they figure that their top investigative reporters will find out enough about the subject in the course of their research. We know that doesn’t work - but I’ve come to the conclusion it’s probably a matter of pride. It’s also perhaps another result of the ‘dumbing down’ of programmes like Panorama - or maybe we should call it tabloidisation. Not that either phrase or word is particularly attractive.
But I still maintain that it’s better to have a tabloidised Panorama in peak time than not to have one at all. At least it is covering stories that we think are important - even if it does display a lack of aviation know-how in the process. I shall continue to try and persuade them to improve their output, but I don’t hold out much hope....
.
I disagree that
My OED defines ‘bribe’ as ‘money, etc, offered to procure action or decision in favour of giver’. Also, earlier in Corbin’s piece, Jeremy Carver, Board Member of Transparency International (www.transparency.org), said
"Those payments, on the face of it, are straightforward bribes as defined by the Ant-Bribery Convention". (of the OECD).
That said, Corbin didn’t actually refer to bribes in her upsum. She said
"...the moral of the story is that if you're a British arms dealer, make sure you've got government cover written into the contract, then a kickback or two should be no problem."
which I think to be fair comment, at least partly because she had referred to ‘kickbacks’ on more than one occasion already.
Altogether, I believe Corbin’s piece moved an important story along.
airsound
to front a Panorama whose primary focus was a military aircraft procurement, I would have though that some grasp of military aviation would have been a help
But I still maintain that it’s better to have a tabloidised Panorama in peak time than not to have one at all. At least it is covering stories that we think are important - even if it does display a lack of aviation know-how in the process. I shall continue to try and persuade them to improve their output, but I don’t hold out much hope....
.
I disagree that
....the use of words like bribe is pretty emotive.
"Those payments, on the face of it, are straightforward bribes as defined by the Ant-Bribery Convention". (of the OECD).
That said, Corbin didn’t actually refer to bribes in her upsum. She said
"...the moral of the story is that if you're a British arms dealer, make sure you've got government cover written into the contract, then a kickback or two should be no problem."
which I think to be fair comment, at least partly because she had referred to ‘kickbacks’ on more than one occasion already.
Altogether, I believe Corbin’s piece moved an important story along.
airsound
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
civobs no teenage angst here mate, just thought it was highly amusing that Blair passed laws that made this kind of backhander illegal in the UK, then denied access to evidence to a fraud investigation, denied that jobs were to do with the decision not to prosecute, then stated that UK national security was at risk from a Saudi threat to withdraw security cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the country that paid for the export of Wahabbism to the World and gave us over half of the 9/11 terrorists?
Like I say, a typical New Labour cock-up, that has been a gift to our industrial competitors and enemies in the World. If I am being treasonous for pointing out alleged illegal activities what does that make you, corrupt?
Like I say, a typical New Labour cock-up, that has been a gift to our industrial competitors and enemies in the World. If I am being treasonous for pointing out alleged illegal activities what does that make you, corrupt?
Last edited by nigegilb; 13th Jun 2007 at 18:02.
"moral angst in the face of mindless bureaucracy and systematic moral turpetude is a good thing, unless it costs lots of jobs and reduces taxation income with consequent reduced spend on services, including the military."
Sorry, I will stick to the moral high ground.
Bliar and Goldsmith's attempts to stop lawful investigation of allegations about BWoS are wholly unacceptable. 'Not in the National Interest' and other statements are spin and tosh. They merely lead to suspicion that Bliar's government know something they don't want exposed.
But if BWoS don't come clean, jobs may well be lost if export customers elsewhere continue to take a dim view of their alleged practices.
Sorry, I will stick to the moral high ground.
Bliar and Goldsmith's attempts to stop lawful investigation of allegations about BWoS are wholly unacceptable. 'Not in the National Interest' and other statements are spin and tosh. They merely lead to suspicion that Bliar's government know something they don't want exposed.
But if BWoS don't come clean, jobs may well be lost if export customers elsewhere continue to take a dim view of their alleged practices.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest news below. Wonder if the US will get to try out the new one way extradition agreement again, kindly passed by Tony Blair's Govt, as well....
US expected to open BAE investigation
David Leigh and Rob Evans
Wednesday June 13, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
The US Department of Justice is now virtually certain to open an investigation into BAE under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
This would cover the alleged £1bn arms deal payments to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, well-placed sources say.
Washington-based sources familiar with the thinking of senior officials at the DoJ, said today it is "99% certain" that a criminal inquiry will be opened.
Such an investigation would have potentially seismic consequences for BAE, which is trying to take over US arms companies and turn the Pentagon into its biggest customer.
US expected to open BAE investigation
David Leigh and Rob Evans
Wednesday June 13, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
The US Department of Justice is now virtually certain to open an investigation into BAE under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
This would cover the alleged £1bn arms deal payments to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, well-placed sources say.
Washington-based sources familiar with the thinking of senior officials at the DoJ, said today it is "99% certain" that a criminal inquiry will be opened.
Such an investigation would have potentially seismic consequences for BAE, which is trying to take over US arms companies and turn the Pentagon into its biggest customer.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can’t imagine how I can have been so wrong.
The use of plane-spotters simply said to me "we are lazy and can't be bothered doing our own research." Much like the shambolic use of stock footage all over the place, adding no value whatsoever. Perhaps that denigrates stock footage filmers too?
It was not an intention to "have a go" at plane spotters and, as I have said, that was not my intention. For any reading this, I apologise, and please take no credence of the words being put into my mouth.
You seem to dislike people having an opinion of their own. Basic principle of journalism I'd have thought. Probably only for the good ones.
I want my licence fee back if that is the ****e the BBC are spewing out.
"Let's assume the £16m and £21m were like for like? "
Sorry, but that's an assumption too far, for me.
I wouldn't even assume that either price was accurate, and would suspect that one was from Jane's planes and the other based on a shirt pocket calculation of "value of contract" divided by "number of Saudi Tornados" equals "shoddy Panorama makey up price tag."
Sorry, but that's an assumption too far, for me.
I wouldn't even assume that either price was accurate, and would suspect that one was from Jane's planes and the other based on a shirt pocket calculation of "value of contract" divided by "number of Saudi Tornados" equals "shoddy Panorama makey up price tag."
Join Date: May 2002
Location: No longer a hot and sandy place....but back to the UK for an indefinite period
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately it is impossible to be awarded contracts in nearly all Mid-East countries without having a local "Agent" or "Sponsor". These guys are normally well connected and charge a % of the overall contract value. I guess in BAEs case the sums involved are allegedly so enormous it makes it very difficult to explain away legally.
However unpalatable it is, this is the known cost of doing business in this part of the world. If we dont do it many other nations businesses will (including a number of well known American contractors.)
BfB
However unpalatable it is, this is the known cost of doing business in this part of the world. If we dont do it many other nations businesses will (including a number of well known American contractors.)
BfB
Thank you for your calm and analytical post, eal410.
I guess you may have diluted your arument slightly there - but as I always say, if you can’t win the argument, slag off the person. . If this was a sporting arena, I guess your words would be classed as a professional foul. But since I don’t know who you are, I can’t tell whether professionalism is a word that figures largely in your life.
It’s another assumption, I know (sorry about that), but I’m assuming from an earlier post that you do actually work at BAES, and that you aren’t very happy there.
Perhaps that’s what makes you so grumpy and prone to these wild bouts of mud-slinging. To venture yet another assumption, maybe the strain of having to keep your mouth zipped whilst at work means that PPRuNe is your only release. If so, that’s very sad. Have you thought of quitting?
Forgive me if I’m completely wrong in my assumptions....
Anyway, thank you for explaining that your initial slagging-off of spotters was really meant to be a criticism of Panorama for using them. Now that is something we could discuss.
were the words you put into Panorama’s mouth. I think that searching out the right spotter is rather good journalistic research. Of course, reporters have to make judgements about the veracity of what a spotter says, but so they do with any piece of evidence offered to them. Also - can you suggest a better way of tracking the journeys of a big, but rather elusive, aeroplane around the globe? I don’t think asking national authorities is going to get you very far, do you? Spotters can provide independent, unbiased information.
I was going to go on to your strictures about what makes a good journalist - but I think I’m losing the will to live.
airsound
....you are clearly an idiot.....will try and pitch at Sun reader level or below in future, just for your benefit.
It’s another assumption, I know (sorry about that), but I’m assuming from an earlier post that you do actually work at BAES, and that you aren’t very happy there.
I can only apologise for those who suffer dealing with BAE senior management, try coping with them day by day! Incompetence seems to be the requirement for career development here!! It can be very frustrating as a subordinate, if it is how customer see us, that is even worse.
Forgive me if I’m completely wrong in my assumptions....
Anyway, thank you for explaining that your initial slagging-off of spotters was really meant to be a criticism of Panorama for using them. Now that is something we could discuss.
"we are lazy and can't be bothered doing our own research."
I was going to go on to your strictures about what makes a good journalist - but I think I’m losing the will to live.
airsound
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yer man F Forsyth often irritates me when he pontificates on things military and that shaded blue (light or dark, no preference) in particular. On this occasion in the Daily Express ( http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/ourcomments/view/9973 ), though, (OK, it's the Express) he shows a fair understanding of the matter.
An insight to dealing with Arabs and Orientals;
The Saudis paid in oil, not cash, so how to pay the commissions? The Prince did not want a percentage of the oil so it had to be direct from BAE Systems to him, in the form of a bank transfer. But was it too much? Whatever the price of the fighters or the commission, that was the deal we cut 20 years ago and if you renege on a signed and sealed deal you will never do business in that, or any, part of the world again because word spreads.
Second, he was the conduit for a whole range of other agents who had worked under him on different parts of the deal.
Third, though it looks enormous it is not vast in percentage terms.
It's a shame that he spoils it in his last sentence
An insight to dealing with Arabs and Orientals;
your most senior sales rep will never meet the king or the ministers, all his brothers and cousins. You have to engage the services of an intermediary. The closer to the throne, the better your chances. And yes, there will be a hefty commission fee. But there would be anywhere in the world. We secured the services of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a Cranwell-educated fighter pilot and firmly pro-British (well, he was until the complainers got stuck in). He is the son of Prince Sultan, the defence minister, then and now. You could not get a higher-placed representative. That is why we got it and the French lost. But here is the rub.
The Saudis paid in oil, not cash, so how to pay the commissions? The Prince did not want a percentage of the oil so it had to be direct from BAE Systems to him, in the form of a bank transfer. But was it too much? Whatever the price of the fighters or the commission, that was the deal we cut 20 years ago and if you renege on a signed and sealed deal you will never do business in that, or any, part of the world again because word spreads.
Second, he was the conduit for a whole range of other agents who had worked under him on different parts of the deal.
Third, though it looks enormous it is not vast in percentage terms.
It's a shame that he spoils it in his last sentence
Now the £20billion Tornado deal will go through. The craftsmen at Filton and Bristol will keep their jobs. Rare as it is, well done Tony Blair.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
DefenseNews: Hungary Investigates Gripen Deal
A Parliamentary Commission is to be instituted in Hungary to investigate allegations surrounding a tender for fighter aircraft destined for the Hungarian Air Force that was eventually awarded to a BAE Systems-Saab consortium.
The outcome of that tender process saw BAE Systems and Saab secure a contract, worth $1 billion, to deliver 14 JAS Gripen aircraft under a 10-year lease-to-own agreement slated to expire in 2016. The delivery schedule saw eight JAS-39 Gripens, including ‘A’ and ‘B’ types, delivered to the Hungarian Air Force in 2006, with the remainder in 2007.
Hungarian Defense Minister Imre Szekeres told a routine session of parliament on June 17 that the commission’s inquiry would include allegations that an Austrian intermediary on BAE Systems and Saab’s payroll may have used questionable tactics in lobbying the Hungarian government on behalf of the British-Swedish consortium.
“Due to the importance of the case in Hungary, we must analyze the Gripen decision, the tender and its consequences. The government is supportive of setting up a parliamentary commission to probe the case,” said Szekeres.
The then center-right Hungarian government initially signaled in June 2001 that Lockheed Martin’s F-16 had won the fighter jet tender. Three days later, the government reversed its position and awarded the order to Saab and BAE Systems. Saab and BAE Systems have consistently denied any impropriety.
The proposed inquiry happens as the BAE Systems-Saab consortium are under scrutiny by British and Swedish prosecutors probing allegations that the consortium may have offered unfair inducements to win a contract to sell 24 JAS Gripen fighters to the Czech Republic.
A Parliamentary Commission is to be instituted in Hungary to investigate allegations surrounding a tender for fighter aircraft destined for the Hungarian Air Force that was eventually awarded to a BAE Systems-Saab consortium.
The outcome of that tender process saw BAE Systems and Saab secure a contract, worth $1 billion, to deliver 14 JAS Gripen aircraft under a 10-year lease-to-own agreement slated to expire in 2016. The delivery schedule saw eight JAS-39 Gripens, including ‘A’ and ‘B’ types, delivered to the Hungarian Air Force in 2006, with the remainder in 2007.
Hungarian Defense Minister Imre Szekeres told a routine session of parliament on June 17 that the commission’s inquiry would include allegations that an Austrian intermediary on BAE Systems and Saab’s payroll may have used questionable tactics in lobbying the Hungarian government on behalf of the British-Swedish consortium.
“Due to the importance of the case in Hungary, we must analyze the Gripen decision, the tender and its consequences. The government is supportive of setting up a parliamentary commission to probe the case,” said Szekeres.
The then center-right Hungarian government initially signaled in June 2001 that Lockheed Martin’s F-16 had won the fighter jet tender. Three days later, the government reversed its position and awarded the order to Saab and BAE Systems. Saab and BAE Systems have consistently denied any impropriety.
The proposed inquiry happens as the BAE Systems-Saab consortium are under scrutiny by British and Swedish prosecutors probing allegations that the consortium may have offered unfair inducements to win a contract to sell 24 JAS Gripen fighters to the Czech Republic.