Sunny's comment;
"I thought of what I know about how contractors work on complex IT projects - how you bid low and then add on "variations" until the cost is triple the original budget".
Absolutely.
ASA will have allowed for variances of at least 10%. If you calculate that that on top of a $1 billion dollar project you get a tidy sum of $100 million in extra costs burning through the taxpayers pockets. And keep in mind that blowouts on top of the total project and variance costs are more than likely! A project of this scale should be micro-managed by the client, but I doubt if ASA could be bothered or has any incentive to do so. Why? Well it's not 'company money' they have to worry about, it's only taxpayer money so who cares as it is the 'bucket of money that keeps on giving', plus ASA have proven that they are untouchable so why care about transparency and accountability?
I would also guess that by the time the OneSky project is finished and all the dirty secrets start leaking out and hitting the fan, the current mob of muppets over-sighting the organisation will be long retired and will have moved on, possibly working for Thales as Consultants or retired to their own private island in the Maldives!
I have a project background that I keep under wraps for good reason, but I can assure you that someone, somewhere will be cleaning house with this project. Any tender that government advertises will always be milked by a savvy contractor and OneSky will be no different. I would like to see our very astute Senators use the senate estimates structure to demand forensic reports and analysis of the ASA OneSky project moving forward.
Oink oink for all
"I thought of what I know about how contractors work on complex IT projects - how you bid low and then add on "variations" until the cost is triple the original budget".
Absolutely.
ASA will have allowed for variances of at least 10%. If you calculate that that on top of a $1 billion dollar project you get a tidy sum of $100 million in extra costs burning through the taxpayers pockets. And keep in mind that blowouts on top of the total project and variance costs are more than likely! A project of this scale should be micro-managed by the client, but I doubt if ASA could be bothered or has any incentive to do so. Why? Well it's not 'company money' they have to worry about, it's only taxpayer money so who cares as it is the 'bucket of money that keeps on giving', plus ASA have proven that they are untouchable so why care about transparency and accountability?
I would also guess that by the time the OneSky project is finished and all the dirty secrets start leaking out and hitting the fan, the current mob of muppets over-sighting the organisation will be long retired and will have moved on, possibly working for Thales as Consultants or retired to their own private island in the Maldives!
I have a project background that I keep under wraps for good reason, but I can assure you that someone, somewhere will be cleaning house with this project. Any tender that government advertises will always be milked by a savvy contractor and OneSky will be no different. I would like to see our very astute Senators use the senate estimates structure to demand forensic reports and analysis of the ASA OneSky project moving forward.
Oink oink for all