#thalescontract — Public Fediverse posts

3/3
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?

Despite the government’s recognition of the project’s risks, AUKUS is full steam ahead. But if Defence can’t manage two munition factories, how is it going to manage a much riskier program with gigantic cost implications?

Further, how much impact will a budget-draining project like AUKUS have on goals like munition supply resilience? As Crikey understands, several projects are already being trimmed to ensure there’s enough money available to meet the financial commitments made under AUKUS.

Munition supply in time of war is critical, as are fuel security and industry capability and resilience. But as ANAO’s audit, the war in the Middle East and our experience during the pandemic show, we aren’t getting these things right. If you struggle to buy bullets, you probably shouldn’t be focusing on buying submarines that only exist on paper and that break the laws of physics.”

3/3
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?

Despite the government’s recognition of the project’s risks, AUKUS is full steam ahead. But if Defence can’t manage two munition factories, how is it going to manage a much riskier program with gigantic cost implications?

Further, how much impact will a budget-draining project like AUKUS have on goals like munition supply resilience? As Crikey understands, several projects are already being trimmed to ensure there’s enough money available to meet the financial commitments made under AUKUS.

Munition supply in time of war is critical, as are fuel security and industry capability and resilience. But as ANAO’s audit, the war in the Middle East and our experience during the pandemic show, we aren’t getting these things right. If you struggle to buy bullets, you probably shouldn’t be focusing on buying submarines that only exist on paper and that break the laws of physics.”

2/-
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?

Further, it seems Defence has been getting some very simple things wrong. For example, ANAO found there was a gap of $109 million between the publicly reported total contract value and Defence’s total financial commitments under the contract. The dog ate my $109 million!

But the overarching concern uncovered in ANAO’s new audit is that it seems Defence, like a kid in a candy store, is simply treating these munitions facilities as a place to buy bullets and bombs — not looking at them as a domestic asset to meet future defence needs.

Hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars: Tallying Defence’s toxic submarine waste
Hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars: Tallying Defence’s toxic submarine waste
There was no focus on resilience and scalability moving forward. Industrial preparedness and manufacturing uplift were not being built into contracts, with attention placed instead on baseline operations and the delivery of mature products — and despite this, there’s been a 70% increase in breakdown maintenance. Perhaps even more alarming was the reported risk of a shrinking pool of specialist personnel.

One imagines a local garage where the mechanics are working with increasingly unreliable equipment, and there’s no plan to get the workshop ready for electric vehicles. The older mechanics are happy working on Ford GTs and Holden Commodores, but it’s hard to retain younger mechanics keen to work on recent and emerging car technologies. You’re left wondering if the garage is going to be there when you might need it to fix your car.

What hope does AUKUS have?

The second instalment of ANAO’s audit of the Thales contract comes in the wake of the government’s realisation, finally, that Defence procurement is a basket case. As Crikey has extensively covered, Defence has wasted colossal amounts of money on its projects, which are almost always hampered by delays and cost blowouts.

At a Press Club address earlier this month, Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy talked of one navy procurement he was familiar with, stating, “When navy wrote the capability requirement that breached the laws of physics, Defence went to the market asking for those laws of physics to be broken, and [industry] contractually agreed to breach the laws of physics! And then, when the project inevitably fell apart, each blamed the other for not being able to breach the laws of physics.”

He then went on to state that reform was afoot, with a greater focus on off-the-shelf options that present much lower risks. But, ironically, those reforms aren’t being applied to the biggest and costliest bespoke Defence project: our trilateral AUKUS agreement with the US and UK over nuclear-powered submarines.”

2/-
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?

Further, it seems Defence has been getting some very simple things wrong. For example, ANAO found there was a gap of $109 million between the publicly reported total contract value and Defence’s total financial commitments under the contract. The dog ate my $109 million!

But the overarching concern uncovered in ANAO’s new audit is that it seems Defence, like a kid in a candy store, is simply treating these munitions facilities as a place to buy bullets and bombs — not looking at them as a domestic asset to meet future defence needs.

Hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars: Tallying Defence’s toxic submarine waste
Hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars: Tallying Defence’s toxic submarine waste
There was no focus on resilience and scalability moving forward. Industrial preparedness and manufacturing uplift were not being built into contracts, with attention placed instead on baseline operations and the delivery of mature products — and despite this, there’s been a 70% increase in breakdown maintenance. Perhaps even more alarming was the reported risk of a shrinking pool of specialist personnel.

One imagines a local garage where the mechanics are working with increasingly unreliable equipment, and there’s no plan to get the workshop ready for electric vehicles. The older mechanics are happy working on Ford GTs and Holden Commodores, but it’s hard to retain younger mechanics keen to work on recent and emerging car technologies. You’re left wondering if the garage is going to be there when you might need it to fix your car.

What hope does AUKUS have?

The second instalment of ANAO’s audit of the Thales contract comes in the wake of the government’s realisation, finally, that Defence procurement is a basket case. As Crikey has extensively covered, Defence has wasted colossal amounts of money on its projects, which are almost always hampered by delays and cost blowouts.

At a Press Club address earlier this month, Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy talked of one navy procurement he was familiar with, stating, “When navy wrote the capability requirement that breached the laws of physics, Defence went to the market asking for those laws of physics to be broken, and [industry] contractually agreed to breach the laws of physics! And then, when the project inevitably fell apart, each blamed the other for not being able to breach the laws of physics.”

He then went on to state that reform was afoot, with a greater focus on off-the-shelf options that present much lower risks. But, ironically, those reforms aren’t being applied to the biggest and costliest bespoke Defence project: our trilateral AUKUS agreement with the US and UK over nuclear-powered submarines.”

1/-
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?
A billion-dollar munitions contract was awarded to a French state-owned company after a calamitous, one-horse tender process. The second instalment of an audit report reveals a litany of concerns.”
REX PATRICK
JUL 14, 2026
(Article *currently* signup walled)
“In 2020, the Australian government signed a 10-year $1.2 billion contract with Thales — a partially French state-owned defence company — to operate two Commonwealth-owned factories to domestically produce guided weapons, explosive ordnance and other munitions for the Australian Defence Force.

As Bernard Keane wrote for Crikey in 2024, this billion-dollar contract was awarded after a tender process that only included Thales as a bidder, and for which Thales assisted in writing the tender documents. Despite this, Thales still bungled its proposal, with it considered significantly deficient and “high” risk, and with 199 non-compliances against the tender documents that Thales helped create.

Despite this, Defence awarded the contract to Thales anyway.
We know all of this from part one of an audit conducted by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in 2024, which found the munitions contract with Thales lacked probity and involved unethical conduct. (There was also evidence that a Defence official had solicited a bottle of champagne from a Thales representative.) The unethical conduct was referred to the black hole that is our National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), and nothing has been seen since.

It painted, as Keane wrote, a damning picture of “the worst Commonwealth purchasing exercise ever”.

A waste of taxpayer money

Last week, ANAO published the second instalment of its examination of this munitions contract with Thales, looking more specifically at the conduct of the contract’s implementation since it was awarded.

ANAO asked, essentially, does the Defence Department have effective contracting and governance in place, and has it managed the contract effectively to achieve value for money for the taxpayer? The answer — no, not really. Defence has only been “partially effective” and could only provide “limited assurance” that it has spent taxpayer money efficiently, the report states.

It also found that the original munitions contract value with Thales has increased by $608 million to a total of $1.9 billion. That is not necessarily an indicator of poor performance, as the increase has largely been associated with increased production orders. But ANAO did find that $43 million had been wasted on cancelled orders and products not delivered as planned.

1/-
#AUKUS #DefenceProcurements #GovtContracts #Budget #ThalesContract #ANAO #AuditReport #AusPol #PatConroyMP

“ *Defence has bungled its disastrous $1.9bn munitions contract with Thales. What hope does AUKUS have* ?
A billion-dollar munitions contract was awarded to a French state-owned company after a calamitous, one-horse tender process. The second instalment of an audit report reveals a litany of concerns.”
REX PATRICK
JUL 14, 2026
(Article *currently* signup walled)
“In 2020, the Australian government signed a 10-year $1.2 billion contract with Thales — a partially French state-owned defence company — to operate two Commonwealth-owned factories to domestically produce guided weapons, explosive ordnance and other munitions for the Australian Defence Force.

As Bernard Keane wrote for Crikey in 2024, this billion-dollar contract was awarded after a tender process that only included Thales as a bidder, and for which Thales assisted in writing the tender documents. Despite this, Thales still bungled its proposal, with it considered significantly deficient and “high” risk, and with 199 non-compliances against the tender documents that Thales helped create.

Despite this, Defence awarded the contract to Thales anyway.
We know all of this from part one of an audit conducted by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in 2024, which found the munitions contract with Thales lacked probity and involved unethical conduct. (There was also evidence that a Defence official had solicited a bottle of champagne from a Thales representative.) The unethical conduct was referred to the black hole that is our National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), and nothing has been seen since.

It painted, as Keane wrote, a damning picture of “the worst Commonwealth purchasing exercise ever”.

A waste of taxpayer money

Last week, ANAO published the second instalment of its examination of this munitions contract with Thales, looking more specifically at the conduct of the contract’s implementation since it was awarded.

ANAO asked, essentially, does the Defence Department have effective contracting and governance in place, and has it managed the contract effectively to achieve value for money for the taxpayer? The answer — no, not really. Defence has only been “partially effective” and could only provide “limited assurance” that it has spent taxpayer money efficiently, the report states.

It also found that the original munitions contract value with Thales has increased by $608 million to a total of $1.9 billion. That is not necessarily an indicator of poor performance, as the increase has largely been associated with increased production orders. But ANAO did find that $43 million had been wasted on cancelled orders and products not delivered as planned.