The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is finding it difficult to scrutinise defence spending because all 13 parliamentarians on the committee have no military background.

NONE PAC member Tony Pua said that, when a request was made for an independent advisor with military expertise to assist the committeee, the Defence Ministry went on the defensive.

“We don't know if (the ministry) is telling us bulls**t or telling the truth. We can only take what they say at face value,” the DAP’s Petaling Jaya Utara MP told a forum on defence spending last night.

Referring to the PAC probe on the RM2.3 billion Eurocopter purchase, Pua said the ministry avoided giving a breakdown of the customisation by accusing the committee of doubting the military.

“Whenever we questioned the need (for such customisation) like the 24 hour without refuelling search and rescue ability, they got defensive.

“They said, 'Are you questioning the experienced generals who sacrifice (their) lives to protect you?’. How do we respond to generals who say ‘we know better than you about what the country needs’?”

He told the audience of 50 that, at present, parliamentarians do not have the “right to demand answers” from the ministry.

“I can't ask the minister in Parliament to show us a balance scorecard. He'll say ‘go to hell’, or rather he'll just not answer.

“They avoid the subject and they have the right to do so. We need the institutions, so you have the right to ask the questions and to demand answers.”

Pua also noted that the Eurocopter purchase was also hard to scrutinise as an offset programme made it difficult to compare to a similar Brazilian purchase at about half the price.

Unlike in Brazil, Eurocopter needs to set up hangars, factories and other investments in Malaysia, which the ministry has cited as justifying the higher purchase price, but Pua said this has not been audited.

NONE According to fellow panelist and Transparency International UK military expert Alan Waldron (standing, in photo) , offset programmes are also a “huge” area of corruption.

“In some cases, the offset is 150 percent of the purchase price equipment. That sounds really good. I get 100 tanks, and get 150 tanks worth of investment in the country. Great!” remarked the former air force general.

“Wrong. That is where corruption comes in. Unless there is oversight, this is where you lose money.”

Military expertise crucial

Speaking to Malaysiakini on the sidelines of the Suaram-organised forum, Waldron said it is also absolutely crucial for an oversight committee to have a defence expert on board.

Beyond having the knowledge to meaningfully scrutinise procurements, he said that the Defence Ministry and the military would be more open to suggestions from an ex-military person.

He said that, using his background and expertise, he managed to convince countries to reduce arms spending by simply discussing things like “why the jets need three engines instead of two”.

Waldron, who has been on TI-UK's International Defence and Security Programme for seven years, said the procurement process remains the most open to abuse, and that independent monitors should be involved from the start.

“You need to introduce independent monitors, technical monitors, monitors for the writing of the contract, to give assessments of the equipment and delivery, make sure it works, that the spares are there,” he added.

Also on the panel were Suaram director Kua Kia Soong and Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility representative, Dr Ronald McCoy.