Awarding of $1 billion contract without tender needs explanation

Interesting letter in the Canberra Times.

Awarding of $1 billion contract without tender needs explanation

In light of the recent revelations regarding Jane Halton's intervention and the subsequent dumping of Elbit Systems by the Australian Federal Police as provider of crime-specific command and control software, it's concerning to learn that not only has the Capability and Sustainment Group (Defence Materiel Organisation's new name) continued to engage Elbit Systems, but it has awarded it a sole-source contract without tender worth nearly $1billion.

Not only was Elbit Systems unable to deliver functional software in a timely manner to the AFP at the agreed cost, but its only other previous contract with the Australian government, which was to provide a battle-management system to the Australian Army (to facilitate interoperability with the RAAF and RAN, which had previously undertaken the digitisation process) was a complete disaster.

The system delivered couldn't communicate with the US or other allied forces that we regularly deploy alongside, but of more concern was the fact that it couldn't even communicate with existing navy or air force systems. Once the basic faults had been rectified, the initial contract, which was worth approximately $200million, ended up costing three times as much and being two years late.

It is so deficient that any vehicles we've deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan, from helicopters to APCs, have had their Elbit Systems hardware removed and replaced with the US Army's FBCB2 system, at further cost.

Somehow, somebody at the Capability Acquisition and Sustainment Group decided Elbit Systems was so much better than its competition that there was no need to release a request for tender for the nearly $1billion Land 75 Phase 4 contract.

Given the history of Elbit Systems, I'd be interested in seeing an explanation as to how this somewhat secretive decision was arrived at, because, to the casual observer, value for money doesn't seem to have been a consideration.

James Allan, Narrabundah