'Secrecy needed' in Saudi deals

The ambassador said the UK was trusted to be discrete

The Saudi government trusts Britain to keep its business dealings secret, the British ambassador to Riyadh has said.

William Patey was giving evidence at an information tribunal, which will rule whether papers relating to a £43bn Al-Yamamah deal should be published.

Campaigners say ministers are fighting the Freedom of Information request so as not to "offend" the Saudi royals.

Mr Patey told the tribunal keeping a secret was "the basis on which we do business" with the Saudis.

The papers relate to the Al-Yamamah deal with BAE Systems in the 1980s - Britain's biggest arms export deal.

The Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) requested various "memoranda of understanding" under the Freedom of Information Act in 2005.

But the government has refused, saying it would be a breach of confidentiality and was not in the public interest, as it would damage relations between Saudia Arabia and the UK.

'Above and beyond'

On the first day of the tribunal, which will rule whether the government should publish the papers, Mr Patey said: "The Saudis put a great deal of trust in our discretion. They put trust in us that we can keep a secret.

"That is the basis on which we do business. Letting them down is something that they remember."

When are the government and the Saudis going to realise that they cannot continue to evade public accountability in the UK Symon Hill CAAT Judges to rule on BAE challenge

He also said that Saudi Arabia had gone "above and beyond the call of duty" to cooperate on counter-terrorism matters.

The strategic importance of the counter-terrorism relationship between the UK and Saudi Arabia was cited by former PM Tony Blair as a reason for dropping a fraud investigation into the Al-Yamamah deal in December 2006.

The information tribunal hearing is expected to take several days.

Hold to account

Earlier CAAT called the Liberal Democrats' deputy leader Vincent Cable who told the tribunal it was Parliament's job to hold the government to account and it could not do that properly without access to original documents.

CAAT spokesman Symon Hill said: "Once again the government is seeking to frustrate the rule of law and the citizen's fundamental constitutional rights in the UK on the basis that Saudi royals will be offended.

"When are the government and the Saudis going to realise that they cannot continue to evade public accountability in the UK?"

CAAT has also been at the high court recently, challenging the Serious Fraud Office's decision to drop its inquiry in December 2006 - that ruling has been reserved.

The original deal included the sale of Tornado aircraft

The SFO had been investigating whether BAE gave money to Saudi officials to help secure contracts in the 1980s - focusing on the £43bn Al-Yamamah arms deal in 1985, which provided Tornado and Hawk jets and other military equipment.

BAE Systems, the UK's largest defence group, was accused of operating a slush fund to help it secure the contract - but has always said it acted lawfully.

The probe was controversially dropped in December 2006 when attorney general Lord Goldsmith announced that it was threatening the UK's national security.

But the Liberal Democrats have questioned that decision - suggesting that the SFO was pressured to drop the case amid concerns another multi-million pound Saudi deal - to buy 72 Eurofighter jets from BAE - would be lost.

The then prime minister Tony Blair denied this, saying he had put to one side the effect on "thousands of British jobs and billions worth of pounds for British industry" - as basing the decision on this would have potentially put Britain in conflict with international anti-bribery laws.

He said continuing the probe would have led to months or years of "ill feeling between us and a key partner and ally" and the "strategic interest" - Britain's counter-terrorism dealing with the Saudis - had to come first.

The head of the SFO, Robert Wardle, has also denied coming under any political pressure to drop the investigation. He said he made the decision independently, having been told the inquiry could "seriously damage national security and international security".