![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
Navigation: Contents | Next Page Preliminary pages
|
Chair |
Mr Robert Oakeshott MP |
|
Deputy Chair |
Mrs Yvette D’Ath MP |
|
Members |
Hon Dick Adams MP |
Senator Guy Barnett |
|
Mr Jamie Briggs MP |
Senator Mark Bishop |
|
Ms Gai Brodtmann MP |
Senator Annette Hurley |
|
Mr Darren Cheeseman MP |
Senator Helen Kroger |
|
Mr Josh Frydenberg MP |
Senator Glenn Sterle |
|
Ms Deb O’Neill MP |
|
|
Ms Laura Smyth MP |
|
|
Hon Alexander Somlyay MP |
|
Secretary |
Mr David Brunoro (from 3 February 2011) |
|
Mr Russell Chafer (until 2 February 2011) |
Inquiry Secretary |
Ms Stephanie Mikac |
ANAO |
Australian National Audit Office |
AUC |
Assets Under Construction |
Cwlth |
Commonwealth |
DMO |
Defence Materiel Organisation |
EVMS |
Earned Value Management Systems |
FMR |
Final Materiel Release |
FOC |
Final Operational Capability |
GRAB |
Gate Review Assurance Boards |
IMR |
Initial Materiel Release |
IOC |
Initial Operational Capability |
JCPAA |
Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit |
MAA |
Materiel Acquisition Agreement |
MOE |
Measures of Effectiveness |
MPR |
Major Projects Report |
PDSS |
Project Data Summary Sheets |
Projects |
Major defence capital acquisition projects |
PoC |
Projects of Concern |
PoI |
Projects of Interest |
UK |
United Kingdom of Great Britain |
The committee recommends that the Major Projects Report (MPR) Work Plan (which contains the MPR Guidelines) be provided to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit concurrently with the list of proposed projects for inclusion and exclusion in the following year’s MPR, no later than 31 August each year.
The committee recommends that Projects of Concern (PoC) not be specifically included in the selection criteria for projects to be reported on in the Major Projects Report (MPR), but where projects reported on in the MPR are also PoC, that they continue to be identified as such.
The committee recommends that the exit criteria for projects reported on in the Major Projects Report be the point at which both Final Materiel Release and Final Operational Capability (as currently defined by the Defence Materiel Organisation and Department of Defence respectively) is achieved.
The committee recommends that in determining whether the exit criteria is appropriate for future Major Projects Reports (MPRs), that the Defence Materiel Organisation’s assessment of the difference in scale, size and incidence of requirements to be completed between Final Materiel Release and Final Operational Capability be provided to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit as soon as possible to allow for the implementation of any changes to occur for the 2011-12 MPR. In conducting its analysis, the DMO should consult with the three services, the Department of Defence, the Australian National Audit Office and industry representatives.
The committee recommends that once projects have met the exit criteria, they be removed from the Major Projects Report (MPR) and for each project which has been removed, the lessons learned at both the project level and the whole-of-organisation level are included as a separate section in the following MPR.
The committee recommends that the Defence Materiel Organisation include in the format of a comparison table, for the listed eleven projects included in the Major Projects Report, columns appearing side by side showing base date dollars, out-turned dollars and current dollars for expenditure information.
The committee recommends that the Defence Materiel Organisation present the findings of its examination of the presentation of financial data on all possible methods for project expenditure information (Eg. Base date dollars, out-turned dollars and current dollars) to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) as soon as it is completed and no later than 31 August 2011.
This examination should include a: (1) preferred method, and (2) comprehensive proposal for transition towards the proposed new arrangement. In addition, the proposed examination should be reviewed by the Australian National Audit Office before it is submitted to the JCPAA for consideration and recommendation prior to inclusion in the MPR.
The committee recommends that the way that Measures of Effectiveness data is presented in the Major Projects Report not be changed until a thorough analysis outlining the reasons for and implications of the change has been undertaken and presented to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit for consideration and endorsement.
The committee recommends, in line with the previous committee’s recommendation, that the Defence Materiel Organisation in conjunction with the Australian National Audit Office develop a standardised graphical representation of each project’s cost and schedule variance for inclusion in the Project Data Summary Sheets for the 2011-12 Major Projects Report Guidelines.
Navigation: Contents | Next Page