A major Defence contractor has accused Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, of failing to tell the truth when he said there had been a competition to choose Australia's next battlefield airlifter.
"Airbus Military is obliged to place on the public record our disappointment at the Minister's choice of words," a spokesman said. "There was no tender process and certainly no competition."
Mr Smith, responding to a specific question at a press conference yesterday, said there had been a competition between Airbus Military's C295 and the Alenia C-27J. "We down-selected the C27J," he said.
"Whenever a choice is made between competitors, there is always someone who's pleased with the outcome and someone who's disappointed. We've done the due diligence and we've come to the conclusion that the C-27 was the preferred choice for us."
Airbus Military says due diligence was lacking and that Defence is spending three times as much money for planes that can't be delivered before 2015.
Read the full story at Brisbane Times
8:35PM 12/5/2012
Aus DoD
--
UPDATE
The following is the Australian Minister for Defence’s
answer to C-27J questions put forward by reporter DAVID ELLERY and is in response to the above article by that
reporter.
Reporter question
is in Bold Text
Stephen Smith Minister for Defence’s response is in plain
text
PacificSentinel
--
In view of the
Airbus Statement does the Minister stand by his assertion that there was a
“competition”?
Yes. A competitive down select to the C-27J was
made following an exhaustive assessment by Defence, the DMO and Air Force of
information provided by the manufacturers of the aircrafts, including Airbus
Military and the C-295.
Can
he specificy the nature of that competition? When was it called? How was
it conducted? Who was specifically asked to participate?
Information was sought from various suppliers throughout
2011.
Alenia, Airbus Military, Raytheon and the US FMS Office
were asked to participate in the process.
Each was asked to provide information on the performance
of their aircraft, as well as costing data, in order
to enable Defence, DMO and Air Force to conduct
a comparative assessment of each aircraft/performance/configuration.
This competitive, comprehensive and comparative
analysis of the attributes of each aircraft against the ADF’s mission
requirements was conducted by Defence, the DMO and Air Force.
Defence seeks to acquire the solution that best meets the
operational requirements of the ADF.
The C-27J flies higher, further, faster and can access
more airfields in our area of interest.
The C-295 is unable to carry some of the equipment that
is vital to support ADF military and Humanitarian Assistance and
Disaster Relief operations.
Can the Minister/Defence
provide written documentation, including communications with Airbus Military,
to confirm that a formal competition process was conducted and that Airbus
Military was given the same opportunity to put its case as Alenia?
An equal and same opportunity was given to both Airbus
Military and Alenia.
Correspondence exchanges between respective suppliers and
Defence are commercial-in-confidence.
While I realise
that is an unusual request we have the interesting situation where a major –
and reputable – military contractor appears to be calling the Australian
Defence Minister a liar.
That is not a characterisation the Minister
places on Airbus Military’s Press Release.
The most
favourable interpretation that could be placed on their remarks is that the
Minister was poorly briefed and does not have a clear understanding of what is
happening in his own department. Could you comment on which of these
scenarios is the most accurate?
Again, that is not a characterisation the
Minister places on Airbus Military’s Press Release.
A competitive down select to the C-27J was made
following an exhaustive assessment by Defence, the DMO and Airforce of
information provided by the manufacturers of the aircraft. The decision
to acquire the C-27J was made by the National Security Committee of Cabinet on
the recommendation of the Department of Defence, the DMO and Air
Force, together with advice from central line agencies including
Treasury and Finance.
SUPPLEMENTARY
QUESTIONS FROM DAVID ELLERY, THE CANBERRA TIMES, 1:50PM 11 MAY 2012
The Minister’s
press release says the 10 C27Js will cost $1.4 billion (at a per unit price
isn’t that close to/even more than the cost of a JSF?) What is the actual unit
cost per plane and what is the support/spare parts/roof racks/hub caps and fox
tail aerial decoration component?
Nine of these
aircraft will be ones that the US is no longer taking. I understand the US
price was around $30 – $31 million per unit – why are they costing us so much?
Airbus Military
could have sold us 10 C295s for about $35 million per unit (representing a
savings to the taxpayer of $1 billion). Is the additional capability alluded to
by the Minister really worth three times as much?
The costs of $1.4 billion include the
acquisition cost of the aircraft, modifications to the aircraft for equipment
needed for specific ADF roles, initial logistics support (including spare
parts, training, materiel handling equipment, technical data, management fees)
testing and certification, and facilities. These costs are be
applied to any aircraft platform chosen. The aircraft being acquired by
Australia are new build aircraft.
The costs quoted by Airbus Military
refer only to the cost of aircraft and do not account for
these essential additional costs.
Airbus would be aware of these essential program
costs being included in Defence projects through its own experience
with the KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft project.
Defence seeks to acquire the solution that best meets the
operational requirements of the ADF. The C-27J flies higher, further,
faster and can access more airfields in our area of interest and was
chosen for performance, configuration and suitability.