Raytheon - there are more questions than answers

Unionists, of course, have never had a problem with the work done by Raytheon and they said so from day one - the unionist attitude has always been straight and to the point - Raytheon was a defence company, it made weapons and what was wrong with that?

Nationalists and republicans had a different attitude, however, and despite the SDLP's initial welcome for Raytheon, the council soon found itself caught up in controversy, as the strength of the anti-war movement grew.

A decade after the arms firm was hailed as helping create a new blueprint for the future, the company shut its doors for the last time, as it struggled to cope with financial losses, protests and apparently mixed messages from councillors who said they had assurances that no military-related work would be undertaken in Londonderry.

In short, the defence company left because it was unable to work on defence projects.

The interim period saw considerable controversy over how nationalists and republicans handled the whole episode, and there have been accusations of a lack of transparency and clarity - and every new attempt to find answers just seems to throw up more questions.

New documents provided to the Sentinel by Derry City Council are no exception. These documents show evidence of the efforts by anti-war campaigners to uncover the nature of the work being done in Londonderry, and to force the

nationalist and republican councillors into withdrawing the "welcome" for Raytheon.

The mystery for many observers, including unionists, may lie in how the nationalist dominated council could not have been aware in the frst place that software with a specific military application was being developed at Springtown.

Documents released to the Sentinel by Derry City Council after a Freedom of Information request, show that in 2004 Raytheon gave the council assurances that it had never made weapons in Londonderry – however it said the "balance" of its work had changed and in fact suggested that, as a defence company, it would like the council's support to help it grow this capability.

In a letter, Raytheon referred to a council motion seeking clarification on the work done at its Northern Ireland Systems and Software Centre, at Springtown.

The letter reads: "Initially, the work undertaken in the facility was primarily Air Traffic Management in nature, however, due to the downturn in the market post 9/11 the level of Government related work has increased.

"The change in balance in the type of work has been fully communicated to the Members of Parliament.

"As far as the concern that the facility is being used for the manufacture of weapons, I can state that this is not the case.

"However I would be delighted to host you at the facility during one of my visits to your city to enable you to see the type of work that is being undertaken.

"I would value your guidance as to how Raytheon, a Defence company, can nurture its relationship with the Council as it is our intention to grow the capability in Northern Ireland but this can only become reality if we receive the overt backing of your team."

Raytheon's comments may be explained by revelations that came much later. The company told the Sentinel in 2009 that projects like ASTOR (Airborne Stand-Off Radar) and (Joint Effects Tactical Targetting System) JETTS – even though they are designed for warfare, are not technically classifed as weapons.

A Raytheon source told The Sentinel that this was because JETTS and ASTOR, while inarguably defence systems, had no direct link to a firing mechanism.

Raytheon's initial arrival in Londonderry saw comments voiced that the city could begin to develop as a 'Silicon Valley'.

Its presence was largely brought about with the help of former SDLP leader John Hume and the announcement was made on the steps of the Guildhall.

Other (non Council) documents in the possession of the Sentinel show how Mr Hume helped the arms giant set up a meeting with then Prime Minister Tony Blair, after the company had previously been refused a meeting because, working along with Shorts, it was in competition to win Government defence contracts, namely to provide Beyond Visual Range Air to Air Missiles (BVRAAM), and ASTOR.

It later lost out on the BVRAAM deal, but won the ASTOR contract. A letter from the principal private secretary at Downing Street, dated January 20, 1999 to Nick Perry in the Northern Ireland Office, says: "John Hume rang me today... He was ringing me about the President of Raytheon, Denis Picard, who was extremely keen to meet the Prime Minister when he came to visit the proposed new Northern Ireland factories at the beginning of February.

"He understood that there had been some diffculty about this in the past, not least because of Raytheon's involvement in major defence contracts."

His idea was therefore that he might take Picard to PMQs on 3 February, and bring him round to see the Prime Minister briefy, on a more social basis, immediately afterwards in the House of Commons.

He was particularly keen on helping Picard because over a thousand new jobs were involved in Raytheon's plans.

"I said that I was sympathetic to this and would get back to him. I would be grateful for any comments you or the MOD might have, before I investigate the diary possibilities."

A letter on the issue from Bruce Robinson, then head of the Industrial Development Board, to the NIO said Raytheon was focussing on Londonderry as a potential location for a centre to provide Air Traffc Control support in Europe, adding: "Furthermore, both the ASTOR and BVRAAM project are being bid along with Shorts, and if successful, would bring approximately 700 additional jobs to Northern Ireland.

"Also, in early December, a request from Raytheon for a meeting with the Prime Minister was declined. We have explained this to Raytheon as a protocol matter in the context of the ASTOR bidding procedure.

"They have accepted this explanation, but continue to express their interest in gaining some access."

Mr Robinson recommended that the meeting proposed by Mr Hume be held.

A Downing Street memo from the subsequent meeting shows that Mr Hume was "largely silent, but commended the IDB's involvement in Raytheon's latest project", Mr Picard said he would not talk to the PM about specifc contracts as they were the subject of competition, but "commended the Tomahawk Programme and congratulated those involved for keeping it on schedule."

He also spoke about the PM's remark about the economic dimension to "solving the Irish problem" and Mr Blair promised he "would stay in touch with John Hume about the Northern Ireland projects. They made a huge difference: jobs and peace were closely linked."

The documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that, on February 9, 1999, six months before the announcement of the NISSC plant, the Industrial Development Board wrote to Mr Hume following a visit by Raytheon executives to Londonderry.

The letter said: "Bob (Skelly) confrmed that his chairman, Denis Picard, had found the NI visit accomplished all that had been behind it and both Thursday evening's dinner and the Friday/ Saturday visit with you in Derry has been extremely successful.

He reported that Raytheon is still very focused on the MoD programmes and the Chairman took the opportunity while in Northern Ireland to press both Mr Trimble and yourself to support Raytheon's joint bid with Shorts," and warning that there might be "no project in Northern Ireland if Raytheon's competitors are awarded the MoD business."

Raytheon won the ASTOR contract in June 1999 and the Londonderry operation was announced in August.

In October, NIO Minister Adam Ingram thanked all who had infuenced the award of the contract, and mentioned "extensive lobbying by the Secretary of State and myself, together with local politicians including David Trimble,

Seamus Mallon and John Hume."

But all was not well, and the Northern Ireland Systems and Software Centre (NISSC) at Springtown found itself making losses.

Last year, the Sentinel published a July 2003 memo from a senior official of Invest Northern Ireland (INI) to then industry minister Ian Pearson released to the paper under the Freedom of Information Act and which recorded a

meeting between Raytheon managers, INI offcials and John Hume.

It said the losses were "not sustainable and that they needed to achieve break-even in the next twelve months. Safeguarding the future of business in Derry would inevitably require doing work beyond air traffc control and into defence contracts".

It quoted Mr Hume as being content that the company needed to explore other opportunities and advising that, "in describing the work in a public arena reference should be made to government contracts rather than MoD contracts", since that could be emotive. This was vehemently denied by the SDLP.

Other documents show that, on August 23, 2004 - a month after the Raytheon letter saying the balance of the work had changed – rather than hide its intentions, Raytheon wanted to seek support from Derry City Council for work on JETTS.

A minute drawn up by an INI official recorded: "Key issue for (Raytheon) on this contract will be the attitude of the council".

Raytheon appears to have gone to considerable lengths to secure political backing for its projects. As well as contacts with Mr Hume, and the July 23 2004 letter to Council, the newly released council documents show the arms firm encouraging councillors to visit and also trying to set up a meeting with the mayor.

One email in mid-2004, from Stephen Lewis at Raytheon, told the mayor's offce: "In response to your query we have made no press releases about the meeting with the mayor".

On December 7, 2004, an email from Raytheon in Harlow, to the mayor's office says: "As you are aware we have been trying for a while now to set up a meeting between the mayor, Stephen Lewis and Alan McCormick...Please can you give me some dates when the Mayor is available in Jan/Feb for an hour and I will work Alan/Stephen's diary accordingly."

The mayor's offce responded on 16 December 2004, on the subject "meeting with Mayor and TCCE, Derry" with three possible dates including January 26 at 11.15am, which was the date suitable for the Raytheon executives according to a response sent the following morning.

At the next Raytheon/INI meeting, on January 27, 2005, according to the documents provided by Invest NI, Raytheon's Londonderry manager "reported that he had a positive meeting with the Mayor of Derry re. the relationship with Raytheon and Derry Council".

On April 27, 2005; according to another INI minute, a senior Raytheon representative "thanked Invest NI for its support during this period, including our input to the Derry Council situation.

"It appears that the current mayor is very supportive."

The latest documents provided by Derry City Council provide no records at all of any meeting between the mayor and Raytheon, nor of any report made to council following any such meeting. It appears that none exist, according to comments made by the City Solicitor.

However the new documents include letters sent by members of Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign - firstly on March 4, 2005, asking the mayor if a meeting had taken place with Raytheon, and again on April 4, asking questions again and saying that they had not even received an acknowledgement of the first letter.

Whatever the truth about meetings, work on JETTS went ahead, and staff from the Londonderry plant worked closely with the MoD's production facility at Warminster in Wiltshire where the JETTS team included members from all three branches of the UK's defence forces.

Far from keeping this secret, Raytheon published the information about its work at Warminster and the involvement of NISSC staff in a 2006 brochure aimed at highlighting its defence projects (pictured).

The article, co-written by a staff member in Londonderry, carried a photograph from Warminster, with another member of the NISSC staff posing with armed forces representatives.

The JETTS system had already been demonstrated at the UK Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration the previous year.

Similarly the information about Minister Angela Smith telling a parliamentary select committee that the firm had worked on JETTS and ASTOR was published in Hansard, the official record of Parliamentary proceedings which is freely available on the internet.

However, even within Invest NI documents, there were apparent contradictions. One set of documents said: "More recently the (Londonderry) centre has been engaged in support of work programmes for the Corporation's ASTOR and JETTS contracts".

Yet the same document noted: "Raytheon appear to be content that NISC remain in the civil/commercial arena and not to undertake any military business.

"The focus has to date sustained the current level of 40 posts at the facility. However the main JETTS contract is scheduled for renewal mid calendar year 2009, with the lease on the Derry facility due to expire early 2010".

The newly released council documents include a minute dated 28/9/04 which records councillor McLaughlin asking if the proposed visit to Raytheon had been arranged, and Councillor Ramsey suggesting that FEIC members take part and asking the town clerk to advise the firm that if it was not agreeable to this, then the council would reconsider its position.

A letter sent by the City Solicitor Damien McMahon in January 2005, told Mr McCormick councillors would accept the invitation to visit the NISSC facility but had resolved that representatives of FEIC be included.

In April 2005 Raytheon said it was delighted that the council had accepted the invitation but that non council members would not be able take part.

Councillors decided on 16 June 2005 to invite FEIC to address a committee meeting, and to make arrangements to visit NISSC, and the City Solicitor wrote to Raytheon on June 20 to seek possible dates and inquire about how many members could take part in the visit.

The documents show FEIC agreed to take up its invitation to address the Policy and Resources committee on 15 December, of that year.

They also show that in September of the following year, following the revelations that work on JETTS was being done in the city, the town clerk wrote to Raytheon saying that the council wanted to clarify the situation and asking for a meeting to be set up with a council delegation.

Raytheon suggested October 9 as a date for such a meeting. Derry Anti War Coalition's Goretti Horgan wrote on October 3, asking for DAWC to be able to address councillors following the revelations about JETTS.

In advice to the town clerk, the city solicitor wrote on October 12: "I am conscious that Council previously received a deputation – on two occasions which was exceptional – from Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign on the same

subject. I feel, however, that no issue arises in relation to this request in that regard as the request is, prima facie, from another group and, in any event, the recent admission that Raytheon is, in fact, carrying out military work in its plant in Derry, apparently contrary to previous assurances given to Council, raises a new set of circumstances which could, properly be the subject of a deputation request such as this one.

"The only unknown factor, for me, is that I understand there may have been recent meetings involving Council and Raytheon which may have some bearing on this particular request for deputation facilities."

At a meeting on October 24, it emerged that Raytheon had confirmed to councillors that it was carrying out work on JETTS and the Council resolved to write to the UK and Irish governments "urging them to use every means at their disposal to ensure much stronger control on the arms trade".

A member of the SDLP was recorded in official minutes as saying that any company carrying out work on weapons systems as part of the arms trade should not claim to have the support of the council, but added that Council needed to be clear that it could not prevent companies from locating in the area, providing they were operating within the law.

"Neither can we ask companies to leave," he added.

The record shows a Sinn Fein member concluding that work like the JETTS project was unwelcome in the city.

He also said he had attended a meeting "many years ago, when Mayor Crumley was in office, at which these assurances were given".

Explaining what these assurances were he continued: "Raytheon local manager, Mr Henry Winkler told us that the Derry facility was engaged in civil work on air traffic control systems.

"It also worked on other civil applications but was not engaged in defence work, as Raytheon refer to it, and that Raytheon had no plans to introduce such work in Derry.

"He did not say that they would never do so but that they were not doing so and had no plans to do so. That was the explicit assurances we were given...

"So the position we adopted makes it clear that work on weapons or software for weapons is unwelcome in this city. We drew the line carefully and went so far as to say (and this was not accepted by some of those campaigning for an ethical investment approach) that software that had a mixed use would be acceptable so long as it was being developed for a civil purpose.

"Only software whose end use is a military application is included in our position."

FEIC also wrote seeking a deputation to the Policy and Resources committee, and agreed to take part on the same date as DAWC.

The campaign by anti-war protestors intensifed in the wake of the JETTS revelations.

The new FoI documents released by the council recorded that a further attempt was made by DAWC in August 2007 to make a presentation to a committee.

A letter from Eileen Webster, chairperson of DAWC, said: "A delegation of the Anti War Coalition recently returned from Lebanon.

"We believe that information and opinions gathered from a wide range of sources there throw new light on the involvement of products of the Raytheon company in the conflict in Lebanon and adjacent states.

"We believe that the information and opinions brought back are of relevance to the position of the Council as set out in meetings in January and April, 2004 and subsequently with regard to the activities of Raytheon at its Derry

plant."

In a memorandum dated 24 September, the city solicitor told the town clerk: "I refer to correspondence dated 16th August 2007 received by you from Eileen Webster of the Derry Anti War Coalition requesting a deputation to Council or its relevant Committee concerning the activities of Raytheon, based on information gathered in a recent visit to Lebanon.

"Subsequently, there has been renewed media coverage of the position of Raytheon in Derry, prompted, it seems, by the Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign (FEIC).

"In addition, a Freedom of Information Act request has been received from FEIC on the same subject. Finally, the solicitor for Eamon McCann – one of the 'Raytheon 9' currently facing criminal charges in the Crown Court has requested voluntary disclosure of all documentation passing between or touching upon Council's engagement with Raytheon as part of the preparation of Mr McCann's defence (adding that they will seek a court order for disclosure

of this material should it not be made available on a voluntary basis. (I am writing to you separately on this matter).

"Council has always adopted a very liberal attitude to receipt of deputations and it is diffciult to see any objective reasons why this request should not be facilitated.

"One might have suggested that this subject (having been ventilated twice previously by deputations from FEIC and DAWC) should be refused on that basis.

"However, DAWC have already anticipated such a potential objection by stating that there is new information available gathered on their recent visit to Lebanon.

"The difficulty is that there appears to be a fresh sustained assault on the presence of Raytheon in Derry and, as part of that strategy a determination to either embarrass or inveigle the Council into a position that the Council condemn Raytheon and its presence in Derry: it may well be that this request for deputation facilities is but one element in that strategy.

"If this is correct then the request should be treated with some hesitancy. Might it be appropriate to raise this request at a party leaders' meeting?"

A scribbled note, at the top of the page reads: "I will raise same at party leaders."

A letter sent to Ms Webster on 12 October said: "As you know the Council was in recess for the month of August.

"Your request has been the subject of consideration and discussion at both Councillor and Council officer level.

"It is noted that the trial of a number of persons in the Crown Court in relation to a protest at the Raytheon premises in Derry is to shortly take place.

"I can also advise that the solicitors for one of the nine defendants have been in communication with the Council seeking information concerning the Council's engagement with Raytheon as part of constructing the defence case in connection with the forthcoming trial.

"The Council has recently processed a Freedom of Information request from the Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign essentially on the same subject, namely the engagement of Council with Raytheon.

"It must also be noted that both FEIC and DAWC have been afforded deputation facilities already, on more than one occasion, in relation to the presence of Raytheon in Derry.

"The view expressed, following discussion and consideration of your request, at both Councillor and Council offce level, is that it would be inappropriate to afford you facilities to come on further deputation in all the circumstances but with particular reference to the fact the Crown Court trial is pending.

"I am sorry, therefore that the Council cannot be of further assistance in this instance."

As far as anti-war protestors were concerned, the council did not go far enough in its condemnation of Raytheon and therefore had not lived up to the spirit of its notice of motion.

But the documents show that, as far as the council was concerned, it had implemented all required actions.

A memorandum from the City Solicitor to the town clerk, dated January 14, 2009, addressed questions raised by Councillor MacLochlainn in connection with a potential protest at the Policy and Resources Committee meeting.

Mr MacLochlainn was particularly concerned with two issues: whether all decisions taken by Council in connection with Raytheon had been actioned; and how any potential disruption could be addressed.

Mr McMahon enclosed copy correspondence furnished to FEIC on foot of a FoI request in 2007, and summarised a number of points starting with the Notice of Motion in April 2004.

It included the paragraph: "Raytheon's reply, dated 23rd July 2004 (copy enclosed) was presented to Council, resulting in ongoing discussions with Raytheon involving the then Town Clerk and the then Mayor. (I have no record of those discussions nor do I believe that any such records exist.)"

The summary also said: "There appears to be a suggestion from those behind the potential protest that Council did not implement a decision requiring some further step to be directed at Raytheon.

"This is not the case: the only steps required by Council were to seek clarification of the nature of its work in its Derry plant from Raytheon in 2004 and again in 2005 and to arrange a visit to the plant for Council, joined by representatives of FEIC. All of these actions were implemented.

"It is certainly the case that at the monthly Policy and Resources Committee meeting of November 2006 when representatives of the Anti War Coalition were granted the privilege of addressing the Committee, that they called on the Council to write again, in certain terms, to Raytheon: however neither the Committee nor, subsequently the Council, passed any resolution to take any further action such as that demanded, or otherwise."

Raytheon eventually left Londonderry last year, and the Sentinel revealed that its senior executives believed that, following a jury's acquittal of protestors who broke into the plant, their staff could no longer trust in the protection of the legal system, "combined with a perceived lack of support from Derry City".