SA Navy ‘did not overlook cheaper British submarines’

State arms procurer Armscor’s project manager for submarines, Rob Vermeulen, on Monday refuted claims that South Africa had overlooked an opportunity to purchase cheaper, British-manufactured Upholder/Victoria-class submarines.

He was responding to a question put to him by arms procurement commission evidence leader Sammy Lebala SC, who asked whether there was any truth to critics’ claims that Armscor sidelined the cheaper submarines by opting for an expensive German model due to corruption.

Mr Vermeulen resumed his testimony after Armscor and the Department of Defence relented to the commission’s demand that they declassify all sensitive documents. Judge Willie Seriti had postponed the hearings to give the government time to declassify the documents, saying he wanted to see all of them.

Mr Vermeulen said independent experts helped the South African Navy set up criteria to evaluate prospective submarines. The top priority was to measure the capabilities of the submarines and the age of the technology aboard the ship. "It was a blessing in disguise that we did not get to use these submarines," he said.

He said the disadvantage of the British Upholder submarine — which ran on a diesel engine instead of a nuclear reactor — was that it was old technology designed in the UK in the late 1970s to supplement the Royal Navy’s nuclear submarine force. This would have made it difficult to repair them locally in Simon’s Town.

The four countries that were short-listed (Germany, France, Italy and Spain) were, however, offering the latest technology.

While the British submarines were seen as cheap, it was already known they had technical problems that eventually escalated their cost.

The British had sold the submarines to the Canadian Navy, and political parties in Canada had claimed the submarines deteriorated while in storage. "Many were never in service in Canada and this resulted in fruitless expenditure," Mr Vermeulen said.

Mr Vermeulen also denied that senior navy staff had interfered with the short-list scores of the procurement division.

Meanwhile, activist organisation Lawyers for Human Rights on Monday complained on behalf of Paul Holden, Hennie van Vuuren and Andrew Feinstein about the "secrecy regarding Armscor witnesses", saying they had only been informed by way of the commission’s website, on September 27, about witnesses scheduled to testify on behalf of Armscor from September 30.

"The testimony of Armscor officials — the state arms procurement corporation — is key to understanding who and how the procurement decisions were made," it argued.

It also expressed its concern about the failure of the commission to make available documents at its disposal to interested parties, despite the fact that both Mr Feinstein and Mr Holden had made a substantial joint submission — at the commission’s request — that included thousands of pages of supporting documents.