Earlier this year, on Sunday June 17, high level delegations from government and the media met in order to discuss matters "impacting on their working relationships." The main issue apparently raised by government was their concern at the poor quality of reporting in the media.

A joint communiqué issued afterwards stated that "Instances of inaccurate reporting and limited depth were raised by government and discussed." Government promised to "continue strengthening its communication capacity to assist the media in ensuring accuracy and promoting depth of coverage."

Following the meeting Anton Harber, who attended, asked whether "government concern for the quality of our media genuine, or is it - as one might expect - just a way of pressurising the media into being less critical?"

As the old saying goes: you should always be careful about what you wish for, for you just might get it.

On July 10 2007 BBC Newsnight ran an investigation by Peter Marshall into the BAE component of South Africa's controversial arms deal. The programme was well-researched, accurate (albeit with one or two minor errors), and in-depth. Whether our government was pleased by it, is another matter completely. What follows are some transcribed extracts.

Voiceover: "This is BAE's Hawk 100 a lead-in or jet trainer sold to Australia, Canada, Bahrain, and South Africa. That last deal was pushed through at a cabinet briefing in Durban in August 1998. The country's senior defence professional, General Pierre Steyn, smelled a rat. Nine years on he says he still can't understand why the cabinet chose the Hawk over a rival bid from Italy."

Steyn: "The Italian bidder was closer to the overall requirements of the lead-in fighter. It had a lesser performance, but not significantly so. And of course, it was less than two-and-a-half times as expensive."

Interviewer: "It was an extravagance you say?"

Steyn: "If you need a sedan with four seats and a boot to take a family's luggage for four, why do you buy an MPV which takes ten people [indistinct] you don't need that."

Voiceover: "Ten days after the Hawk was chosen General Steyn resigned in protest. He formally told the government: ‘the hawk is not the best option from a military point of view'. Seven years later BAE's Hawks are ready. Alec Erwin was the minister who proudly took delivery. He has now spent the best part of a decade defending the deal."

Interviewer: "General Steyn, who is the expert here, the secretary of defence, he says it was a bad deal."

Erwin: "He is wrong. He is wrong. And the investigation has shown conclusively that is not true what he says. At the time of the conclusion of the investigation he was not in the defence force."

Interviewer: "Which investigation is this?"

Erwin: "Done by the South African agencies: The national prosecuting authority; the public protector; all the constitutional structures."

[CUT]

Voiceover: "The SA government's definitive report on the BAE arms deal came from the auditor-general. Critics say it was filleted, crucial damning information was taken out. The auditor's initial and confidential drafts supplied to ministers says the military didn't want BAE's Hawk. It states: ‘The inclusion of the Hawk would only be considered by the SAAF under extreme duress.' When the report was made public this had disappeared."

Interviewer: "What about the AG's draft report which picked on very serious points and they were excised after going to ministers?"

Erwin: "That is absolute falsehood. Now, let me tell you what happened. And if you had done your homework you would have found this out. He said ‘look, there is my report. Is there anything you would like to clarify on that?' And we made our points. He was entitled... he doesn't have to change it at all. He took it back. You can go and look at his draft, and you can look at his final report. You can look at it very carefully, and you will not find any major excision from the draft report to the second."

Voiceover: "The Auditors draft concludes: ‘The minister could have influenced decisions. Preference was given to BAE-Saab when the rival Italian plane could have been acquired much cheaper.' None of this appears in the final published report."

[CUT]

Voiceover: "Inquiring politicians and investigators felt they had been set up to fail. As things started to go really bad the investigators hold a clandestine meeting here at Johannesburg airport, in a burger bar, with Andrew Feinstein. Remember, the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee. An ANC man himself. They tell him they are not being allowed to carry on the investigation untrammelled. In effect, the government is sabotaging its own inquiries."

Feinstein: "A very senior member of the ANC's highest decision making body asked me to visit him at his home. At that meeting he said to me ‘You have to understand if you pursue this investigation you will not win'. And I said: ‘What do you mean I will not win?' He said: ‘The ANC will not allow an unfettered investigation.' And when I asked him why, he said: ‘Because that is how we funded our 1999 election campaign.'"

Voiceover: "Government ministers deny the ANC received any illicit election funds. They say everything was above board."

Interviewer: "Isn't it true that all the investigations in South Africa have in one way or another be hobbled or sabotaged by the government?"

Erwin: "Absolute rubbish. And you know that that's rubbish because it is a slight on our constitutional structures, which we would resent very strongly particularly coming from the United Kingdom at the moment."

[CUT]

To view the full BBC Newsnight programme "BAE deal shakes SA democracy" click here.