Defend the Indefensible? Report (http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=fadt_ctte/procurement/report/index.htm) From the article: " The office identified a total cost blowout of almost $8 billion and accumulated schedule slippage of almost 119 years for the 28 projects Poor risk assessment and a lack of communication between the Defence Materiel Organisation and the three services were cited as major problem areas. ''Governance of the Australian Defence organisation is dysfunctional,'' he said. ''Defence procurement does not occur in a vacuum"
Then add the cost of running the failed experiment, to achieve fatally flawed projects, called the DMO at $1.3 billion a year, and you get the real cost, apart from the Defence Force having nonexistent capabilities while we stuff around. More http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2011-2012/201011-Major-Projects-Report What do the sycophants really have to say?
The solution is simple really; hugely downsize DMO and create smallish cells thereof within and subordinate to the respective Navy, Army, Air Force, Defence Offices. Make the Chiefs of those agencies fully accountable for origination and management of their own acquisition and support projects, which worked pretty well previously. Dilute Public Service domination by shedding maybe 5,000 of them.
Considering the worsening diabolical status of the RAN, why have successive Chiefs of Navy not been fired over the past couple of decades or so; also CDFs for that matter? Responsibility and accountability go hand in hand.
3 comments:
Defend the Indefensible?
Report
(http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=fadt_ctte/procurement/report/index.htm)
From the article:
" The office identified a total cost blowout of almost $8 billion and accumulated schedule slippage of almost 119 years for the 28 projects
Poor risk assessment and a lack of communication between the Defence Materiel Organisation and the three services were cited as major problem areas.
''Governance of the Australian Defence organisation is dysfunctional,'' he said. ''Defence procurement does not occur in a vacuum"
Then add the cost of running the failed experiment, to achieve fatally flawed projects, called the DMO at $1.3 billion a year, and you get the real cost, apart from the Defence Force having nonexistent capabilities while we stuff around.
More
http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2011-2012/201011-Major-Projects-Report
What do the sycophants really have to say?
The solution is simple really; hugely downsize DMO and create smallish cells thereof within and subordinate to the respective Navy, Army, Air Force, Defence Offices. Make the Chiefs of those agencies fully accountable for origination and management of their own acquisition and support projects, which worked pretty well previously. Dilute Public Service domination by shedding maybe 5,000 of them.
Considering the worsening diabolical status of the RAN, why have successive Chiefs of Navy not been fired over the past couple of decades or so; also CDFs for that matter? Responsibility and accountability go hand in hand.
Accountability seems to be a word removed from word processing software in Defence and DMO.
Post a Comment