Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 

Ministry of Defence: Acquisition Of LAVs

Report Of The

Controller And Auditor-General

Tumuaki O Te Mana Arotake

Ministry Of Defence:

Acquisition Of Light

Armoured Vehicles And

Light Operational Vehicles

August 2001

Overview By The Controller And Auditor-General

This report is about the acquisition of two types of new vehicles for the New Zealand Army (Army):

- light armoured vehicles, which carry troops and provide fire support in battlefield situations; and

- light operational vehicles, which are all-wheel drive vehicles that fulfil roles such as transporting ammunition, equipment and supplies.

The Government signed a contract on 29 January 2001 to purchase 105 LAV III light armoured vehicles, and the first vehicles are planned to be delivered in September 2003. The current cost estimate is $677.464 million (GST inclusive).

The tender for the light operational vehicle was cancelled in May 2000 pending an inquiry into the conduct of the tender. The process was subsequently restarted and the re-tendering of the light operating vehicle is currently in progress.

In November 2000, the Secretary of Defence asked me to undertake a review of the processes for both acquisitions. I agreed to the request because the Audit Office had been intending for a number of years to examine major military acquisitions and this was a good opportunity to do so. I also thought it would be a relatively straightforward exercise.

Some 10 months later, however, I find myself reporting about a wider range of issues - some particular to the acquisitions we looked at, some symptomatic of more fundamental problems, and some a reflection of systemic problems in and between the Ministry of Defence (the MoD) and the New Zealand Defence Force (the NZDF). As always, the Audit Office has a real interest in looking beyond the problems at hand to what are the underlying issues and how they might be resolved for the future.

To carry out our review we:

- interviewed staff from the MoD, the NZDF, Army and the Treasury (including the New Zealand Debt Management Office);

- reviewed documents and files held by the MoD, the NZDF and Army relating to these acquisitions; and

- wrote to some of the tenderers for their perspective on the process followed by the MoD.

At the completion of our field work, we briefed the Secretary of Defence on our preliminary findings. Because of the conflicting views we had received on important matters, we agreed with the Secretary of Defence that we should re-interview key people to try and reconcile these different perspectives.

From our discussions with the Secretary of Defence, we also formed the view that there were other issues we needed to report on - in particular, that there had been a lack of documentation of important elements of the acquisitions. We therefore undertook further work to locate and examine additional papers where we were able to do so. A feature of this review has been that important issues continued to emerge throughout our examination, and we continued to source relevant documentation right up to publication.

Our review focused on these two acquisitions only - we did not examine other acquisitions for either Army or the other two Services. Nevertheless, these projects represent the largest Army re-equipment programme since World War II. The review was a very complex exercise - it involved all elements of our legislative audit mandate, including issues of performance, waste, probity, accountability, and authority.

We have compiled this Report from the markedly divergent views of the MoD, the NZDF and Army. Documentary evidence was often poor. Key decisions were often not recorded. Nevertheless, we feel that we have assembled a compelling picture that illustrates problems in the key areas of:

- governance;

- relationships;

- accountabilities; and

- defence planning.

The legislative and institutional arrangements surrounding the MoD and the NZDF have not helped in these acquisitions. The arrangements include:

- a Defence Planning System that translates the Government’s defence policies and priorities into the size, shape and composition of the NZDF, together with the capabilities (including equipment) required; and

- the MoD having statutory responsibility for acquisitions, in consultation with the NZDF.

A strategically robust and fully operational Defence Planning System is absolutely fundamental to the way in which the MoD and the NZDF go about their business. However, in practice we found that the Defence Planning System, despite having existed for nearly 10 years, has not actually produced a full set of outputs. In our Report to Parliament of December 2000: Central Government: Results of the 1999-2000 Audits we discussed the need for better information on capability, fiscal risks and funding needs for the NZDF. In the absence of a fully operational Defence Planning System, we do not believe that realistic and reliable forecasts can be made for the NZDF’s capital and operating funding in the future.

In theory, the bilateral approach between the MoD and the NZDF could have worked. Instead, we observed an acquisition process based around a tripartite relationship between the MoD, the NZDF and Army. This gave rise to an environment of poor communication, confusion over roles, and dysfunctional relationships. The acquisition projects have slowed, costs have increased, and relationships have been damaged. As a result, Army currently continues to manage with obsolete equipment that is well beyond its useful life - despite the fact that successive Governments have given priority to Army modernisation.

We believe that a number of things to need to happen:

- The Defence Planning System needs to be made operational and produce credible outputs. It underpins the future of the NZDF and the required capital and operational budgets. We are sceptical that the current System will provide the answers.

- A more pragmatic approach needs to be taken to the acquisition method - one model does not necessarily fit all purchase decisions.

- The dysfunctional relationships need to be made functional - and be underpinned by clear accountabilities, a more trusting environment, and more face-to-face communication. For example:

- there needs to be strong project governance to help resolve or avoid the type of disputes that have plagued both of these acquisitions; and

- there need to be open discussions and transparent decisions that are properly documented.

DJD Macdonald

Controller and Auditor-General


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

Education: Primary School Teachers On Strike Again Today

More than 100,000 primary school students in Auckland will be home from school today as teachers and principals walk off the job for the second time this year.

It's the start of a week of rolling one-day strikes around the country, after the collapse of contract negotiations last Thursday.

Several rallies are being held across the city this morning, leading to more than 100,000 students missing school today. More>>

 

"Process Was Sound": Inquiry Into Haumaha Appointment Released

The Inquiry’s purpose was to examine, identify, and report on the adequacy of the process that led to the appointment. It found the process was sound and no available relevant information was omitted. More>>

ALSO:

Govt Loses In Supreme Court: Call For Debate On Prisoners' Right To Vote

The court earlier this week upheld a High Court decision which found that a law restricting a prisoner's right to vote was inconsistent with the Bill of Rights. More>>

ALSO:

Shenanigans: NZ First Accepts Jami-Lee Ross Proxy Vote

The New Zealand First caucus strongly believes that in terms of the Electoral Integrity Amendment Act, that someone in Mr Ross’ position should resign his seat... the New Zealand First Whip will use Mr Ross’ proxy–to be exercised at all times in support of the vote of the National Party... More>>

ALSO:

Call For Conversation: Do You Know What Data Is Being Collected About You?

New Zealand Maori Council has called on a national conversation when it comes to data sovereignty asking the question “just how many people know what data is being collected, why and how is it being used?” More>>

Economic Policy: Gordon Campbell On The Aussie Banks And Their Profits

Some folk rob you with a six-gun, as Woody Guthrie once memorably put it, and some rob you with a fountain pen. And some do it in broad daylight without blinking, while the government looks on impotently. More>>

ALSO:

Drug Law: Cost Benefit Analysis Shows Reform Stacks Up

Both decriminalisation of drugs and introduction of a strictly regulated market for cannabis are fiscally positive. Shifting away from a punitive response to drug use would significantly reduce costs in the criminal justice system. More>>

ALSO:

Strike Looms: DHB Midwives Reject Pay Offer

More than 1100 District Health Board (DHB) employed midwives have voted overwhelmingly to reject the DHBs’ pay offer and to go on strike... Industrial Co-leader Jill Ovens says the idea is to maximise disruption for the DHBs while minimising the effect on women and their babies. More>>

ALSO:

 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

InfoPages News Channels