Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons
dated 18 July 1996 for the Appendices to the Report of the Inquiry into the Export of Defence Equipment and Dual-Use Goods to Iraq and Related Prosecutions laid before The House on 15 February 1996*

Volume Two
Section D Arms and Defence-Related Exports to Iraq
Chapter 7 Other Allegations of Illegal Arms Exports to Iraq

Excerpt:
TWIN 30MM NAVAL GUN

D7.60 On 22 December 1988 BMARC made an application for AWP clearance with a view to promoting a twin 30mm Naval Gun in Iraq. The reference number of the application was D/SALES/408/11/8. The application was included in the lists of applications circulated to the members of the MODWG for consideration by the MODWG at its next meeting on 8 February 1989. *78

D7.61 At the meeting of 8 February 1989 the application was assessed “R(Leth)” by the MODWG. The recommendations of the MODWG were marked on the list of applications and on 14 February 1989 Mr Barrett circulated the list to the members of the IDC for discussion at the next IDC meeting.*79 The recommendation made by the MODWG in relation to BMARC’s application was dealt with at the IDC meeting held on 14 March. The IDC agreed with the recommendation made by the MODWG that BMARC’s application should be refused. *80 The recommendations agreed at the IDC were put up to the Minister (DP), Lord Trefgarne, by way of a submission from Mr Barrett dated 13 April 1989. In a minute dated 18 April 1989 to Mr Barrett, the APS to the Minister (DP) stated that “Lord Trefgarne is content to agree the Committee’s recommendations.” *81 On 16 March 1989 Mr Lillie submitted a copy of the summary record of the IDC meeting of 14 March to PS/Mr Waldegrave, Mr Gore-Booth and Mr Lamport and recommended that the IDC’s recommendations be approved. *82 On 28 March 1989 Mr Simmons wrote to Mr Steadman to “confirm that the FCO accepts the recommendations made by the IDC at their meeting on 14 March” *83

D7.62 DESO subsequently wrote to BMARC to inform the company of the decision. In a letter dated 19 June 1989 to BMARC, DESO stated that “We have now considered your proposal in accordance with the normal practice whereby preliminary clearance is sought from this Department before any application for an export licence which may be required is made to the Department of [Trade and] Industry. However I regret to inform you that approval to disclose this information and preliminary clearance to supply this equipment cannot be granted at the present time.” *84 It is interesting to note that the letter indicates that “the normal practice” was for the MOD to consider applications for AWP clearance. In cases involving Iran and Iraq, the IDC invariably considered the recommendations of the MODWG in respect of AWP applications and had done so in this case.

Endnotes:

*78 - MOD/24.1.257 at 273: see also FCO/6.2.163 & 160

*79 - MOD/24.1.335 at 363

*80 - MOD/25.1.39 at 59: see also FCO/6.2.149

*81 - MOD/25.1.99

*82 - FCO/6.2.147

*83 - FCO/6.2.146

*84 - AST/102 Appendix III p.65

* The Full report is available from The Stationery Office Ltd., PO Box 276, London, SW8 5DT.