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 Three
Section F Supergun
Chapter 2 Government Knowledge - November 1987 until December 1988

Excerpt:
FORGEMASTERS (JULY 1988)

FORGEMASTERS (JULY 1988)

F2.73 According to the evidence submitted to TISC, on 17 June 1988 Forgemasters contacted the “DTI Commercial Section”. The DTI was informed that Forgemasters were in negotiation with an Iraqi customer for components for a petrochemical plant and wished to know what procedures should be followed if an application to the DTI was necessary. Forgemasters were asked to speak to DTI technical personnel. They did so and were informed that an undertaking would be required from the customer that the goods were not to be re-exported, that any of the three parties potentially involved could apply for a licence (i.e., Forgemasters, SRC or the Ministry of Industry, Iraq) and that any such application should be accompanied by details of specifications, drawings, the process to be applied and the material to be used; together with confirmation of the customer and an End User certificate. *129 On 7 July, there were further telephone calls to the DTI which established that an application would be necessary if the product fell into specified groups. The DTI stated that a technical rating would be necessary. Forgemasters were asked to speak to “the technical appraiser on the DTI staff”. They did so and were informed that, while it appeared unlikely that an export licence would be required, a written request should be submitted, “accompanied by the relevant information and also by details of specifications, drawings, material to be used and End User certificate”. On 8 July, two contracts were signed in virtually identical terms, each being for the supply of 26 tubes. However one contract had attached to it a drawing consisting of three lengths of tube and comprehensive information including “the size and dimension of each tube, the method of connection, surface finish and dimensional tolerances.” *130

F2.74 Mr Robert Draper of the DTI Export Licensing Branch, in his written evidence to the Inquiry, has confirmed that, in July 1988, he received several telephone calls from Forgemasters regarding “a possible contract for Iraq”. “The contract”, he said, “involved specialist pipe-link and tubing so I requested a written detailed analysis of the pipeline and tubing to send to our technical advisers for... rating.” *131 The company provided the details under cover of a letter dated 18 July 1988. *132 The letter says that it was enclosing a copy of the contract, a drawing and an order. TISC decided that, although the DTI could not later find a copy of the drawing on their files, a drawing had been submitted by the company. So had a copy of the order. But the Select Committee decided that it appeared that the contract may not have been enclosed with the letter. *133 The Inquiry has received no evidence which supplements that part of the evidence before TISC and I shall adopt TISC’s findings and will proceed on that footing.

F2.75 There is no evidence that Mr Steadman had shared with any of his DTI colleagues either the information about Walter Somers’ tubes which he had had from Sir Hal Miller and Dr Bayliss or the advice he had been given by Mr Weir in relation to them. Even if he had done so, it does not follow that a link would necessarily have been made at that stage between the Walter Somers order and the Forgemasters order, unless Mr Weir had so informed Mr Steadman - it was Mr Weir who knew the link because Dr Bayliss had told him of it in the course of their second telephone conversation. *134 In the event, the DTI’s consideration of the sets of orders placed with the two companies went forward in parallel lines, which did not converge until August 1988.

F2.76 Once Mr Draper had received Forgemasters’ letter of 18 July, the information was copied to Mr Jacob of the Industrial Metals and Minerals Division of the DTI on 21 July 1988. On 22 July, Mr Jacob advised that no licence would be required. *135 On 27 July, Mr Watts of the ELB wrote to Forgemasters to say that, on the basis of the information provided, no licence was required for the export of the Forgemasters tubes. *136

Endnotes:

*129 - Sheffield Forgemasters Chronology: HC 86-iii: p. 183. The chronology gives details of the DTI telephone numbers to which the calls were made, but I have not pursued this in view of Mr Draper’s evidence summarised infra

*130 - Memorandum to TISC by Sheffield Forgemasters: HC 86-xiii: (EQ 61): p. 428;437.

*131 - Mr Draper’s written statement dated 6 May 1993.

*132 - DTI/141.1.9850 at 9855.

*133 - HC 86: paragraph 64; cf Sheffield Forgemasters’ memorandum (EQ 61): p. 428. See also Mr Draper’s supplementary statement in the Supergun prosecution at DTI/141.1.9850 at 9852.

*134 - see paragraph F2.41 supra

*135 - DTI/141.1.9850 at 9854.

*136 - DTI/141.1.9850 at 9853.

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