Victoria Burbidge Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 Lights blue touchpaper and stands well back ........... Cheap Choice Derails Graves Project Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 BANG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bardess Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 What's the long-term weather forecast like? Hope it's not more rain - that's all they need to cope with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victoria Burbidge Posted 5 July , 2009 Author Share Posted 5 July , 2009 What's the long-term weather forecast like? Sunshine and ......... showers. V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarge2871 Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 Glasgow should have got the job in the first place ! I cringed when I first heard they were NOT awarded the job...looks like my fears are going to be well founded...why oh why...does it always come down to the same thing....cost...and yet we continue to waste so much of it on pointless, worthless projects elsewhere. As they say " you get what you pay for " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rendellers Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 I've used this site to register a protest - just said I was disgusted and added a link to the article http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/ContactU...terThankYou.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 Seems that Tony Robinson could have done a better job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedelmar Posted 5 July , 2009 Share Posted 5 July , 2009 I think that was more than a BANG!! It was a KABOOOOOOOMMMMMM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedelmar Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 This article (although at times edited) appeared in all major newspapers across the country. This is a short response from the Australian Govt that appeared on the WA Newspapers website. http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=585642 Bright Blessings Sandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topsey1234 Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 This article (although at times edited) appeared in all major newspapers across the country. This is a short response from the Australian Govt that appeared on the WA Newspapers website. http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=585642 Bright Blessings Sandra Worth also reading the rebuttal on the CWGC website today- its says 60 remains have been found Richard http://www.cwgc.org/fromelles/?page=englis...view/news060709 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 Oooo dear. That does not sound good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Thompson Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 According to the rebuttal article only three of the over 60 individual recovered remains have not had artefacts found on them that directly associated them with the Army they fought for, either the Australian or British. It would be interesting to know what the current split is between the two. Marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelPack Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 Well, the fur is certainly flying if the egregious Mr Rudd has joined the fray: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/06/2617627.htm Perhaps a quote is called for from Mr Browngabe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Tiger Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 Seems that Tony Robinson could have done a better job. & he would have done it in 3 days Seriously though, this is quite worrying Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stiletto_33853 Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 The Sydney Morning Herald news article, highlighted by V, seems to tie in more with a conversation I had with one of the CWGC officials at Fromelles earlier this year in that the bids were about £100,000 pounds difference, as he did mention the difference between the bids was about 6 figures. However, in the light of what we are seeing here I really am wondering why Oxford were given the contract and not GUARD who are familiar with the site having done the initial exploratary dig. I was led to believe in the same conversation that one of the reasons was that Oxford were a little more up to speed on the DNA side of things. However, it would appear from these press reports that the DNA side of this operation is not included in the contract???? which leads me more to wonder even more why this was awarded to Oxford, we can only assume (and it is an assumption) that it was for financial reasons purely. I can only say the same as Andy in the previous post in that "this is quite worrying" Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedelmar Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Mailing List. VA057 Monday 6 July 2009 Fromelles Project - archaeological excavation Greg Combet, Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science, and Alan Griffin, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, today corrected the public record in response to media reporting regarding the Fromelles Project archaeological excavation. “The Government wants to ensure that the recovery of these remains is conducted in a professional and sensitive manner and that the appropriate respect and reverence is paid to these men in all steps of the exhumation and reinterment process,” said Mr Combet. “The choice to engage Oxford Archaeology to undertake the excavation was an international decision, reached using an open and transparent tender process that was aligned with Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines.” “Oxford Archaeology’s services represented the best value for money to the Australian and United Kingdom Governments. The Government is advised that the recovery operation is being conducted with the utmost professionalism and reverence for the soldiers buried at Pheasant Wood.” As one of the largest independent archaeology and heritage practices in Europe, Oxford Archaeology has nearly 400 specialist staff. It also has up to 30 highly experienced specialists including anthropologists and archaeologists on site at all times, and has the capacity to surge additional specialists from within its extensive team to assist the recovery operation at Pheasant Wood as is necessary. “Oxford Archaeology is also very experienced with post war and post warlike archaeology, having conducting recovery operations from a WWII site in France, as well as from other sites in Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia and Guatemala,” Mr Combet said. “A minor delay with the project was caused by very heavy rain in late May this year. However, the project remains on the agreed schedule.” The Fromelles Management Board has advised the Government that no remains or artefacts were compromised by the weather event and that Oxford Archaeology has strategies and options to mitigate against ground water and toxic waste. “All possible care is being taken to ensure that the maximum number of individual remains are able to return a positive DNA reading and allow matching with living relatives,” said Mr Combet. “Also contrary to media reports, Oxford Archaeology has recovered over 60 individual remains from Pheasant Wood. These remains are currently in the on-site temporary mortuary, and only three have not had artefacts found on them that directly associated them with the Army they fought for, either the Australian or British.” Further, contrary to the media reporting there was no ‘crisis meeting’ held at the site. The meeting referred to in the reports was held on 29 June and is a regular monthly meeting of the Fromelles Management Board to discuss project matters and provide guidance to the project managers, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. Minister Griffin said that the Commonwealth War Graves Commission are also overseeing construction of the cemetery which will be the final resting place for those soldiers recovered from Pheasant Wood. “Construction of the Fromelles (Pheasant Wood) Military Cemetery commenced in May, and I am advised that it is on schedule to receive the soldiers’ remains in early 2010.” “I have recently seen aerial photographs which show the cemetery is taking shape. The classic, simple hexagonal design and grave rows radiating out from the centre are now clearly visible.” “It is important these soldiers are given a proper burial place and that relatives, and visiting Australians, have somewhere to pay their respects and honour the sacrifice of these men.” The Fromelles Project is of great importance and remains a priority to Defence and the Australian Government. The Australian Government will continue to closely monitor the progress of this project and will keep the Australian community advised of developments. The official Fromelles Project website can be found at the official Defence website, www.army.gov.au/fromelles, and contains regular updates. Media contact: Rod Hilton (Greg Combet) 02 6277 7620 or 0458 276 619 Belinda Cole (Alan Griffin) 02 6277 7820 or 0437 863 109 Defence Media Liaison: 02 6265 3343 or 0408 498 664 Minister for Defence Media Mail List ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE HON. GREG COMBET MP Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science FROMELLES PROJECT - ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION Greg Combet, Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science, and Alan Griffin, Minister for Veterans' Affairs, today corrected the public record in response to media reporting regarding the Fromelles Project archaeological excavation. "The Government wants to ensure that the recovery of these remains is conducted in a professional and sensitive manner and that the appropriate respect and reverence is paid to these men in all steps of the exhumation and reinterment process," said Mr Combet. "The choice to engage Oxford Archaeology to undertake the excavation was an international decision, reached using an open and transparent tender process that was aligned with Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines." "Oxford Archaeology's services represented the best value for money to the Australian and United Kingdom Governments. The Government is advised that the recovery operation is being conducted with the utmost professionalism and reverence for the soldiers buried at Pheasant Wood." As one of the largest independent archaeology and heritage practices in Europe, Oxford Archaeology has nearly 400 specialist staff. It also has up to 30 highly experienced specialists including anthropologists and archaeologists on site at all times, and has the capacity to surge additional specialists from within its extensive team to assist the recovery operation at Pheasant Wood as is necessary. "Oxford Archaeology is also very experienced with post war and post warlike archaeology, having conducting recovery operations from a WWII site in France, as well as from other sites in Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia and Guatemala," Mr Combet said. "A minor delay with the project was caused by very heavy rain in late May this year. However, the project remains on the agreed schedule." The Fromelles Management Board has advised the Government that no remains or artefacts were compromised by the weather event and that Oxford Archaeology has strategies and options to mitigate against ground water and toxic waste. "All possible care is being taken to ensure that the maximum number of individual remains are able to return a positive DNA reading and allow matching with living relatives," said Mr Combet. "Also contrary to media reports, Oxford Archaeology has recovered over 60 individual remains from Pheasant Wood. These remains are currently in the on-site temporary mortuary, and only three have not had artefacts found on them that directly associated them with the Army they fought for, either the Australian or British." Further, contrary to the media reporting there was no 'crisis meeting' held at the site. The meeting referred to in the reports was held on 29 June and is a regular monthly meeting of the Fromelles Management Board to discuss project matters and provide guidance to the project managers, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. Minister Griffin said that the Commonwealth War Graves Commission are also overseeing construction of the cemetery which will be the final resting place for those soldiers recovered from Pheasant Wood. "Construction of the Fromelles (Pheasant Wood) Military Cemetery commenced in May, and I am advised that it is on schedule to receive the soldiers' remains in early 2010." "I have recently seen aerial photographs which show the cemetery is taking shape. The classic, simple hexagonal design and grave rows radiating out from the centre are now clearly visible." "It is important these soldiers are given a proper burial place and that relatives, and visiting Australians, have somewhere to pay their respects and honour the sacrifice of these men." The Fromelles Project is of great importance and remains a priority to Defence and the Australian Government. The Australian Government will continue to closely monitor the progress of this project and will keep the Australian community advised of developments. The official Fromelles Project website can be found at the official Defence website, www.army.gov.au/fromelles, and contains regular updates. Media contact: Rod Hilton (Greg Combet) 02 6277 7620 or 0458 276 619 Belinda Cole (Alan Griffin) 02 6277 7820 or 0437 863 109 Defence Media Liaison: 02 6265 3343 or 0408 498 664 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auimfo Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 I think the problem is knowing who to believe...........the media or the government????? Personally, I'll take both claims and find the middle ground and that way I'm probably close to the truth. Cheers, Tim L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca172 Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 Hey....if its in either the Fairfax or Newscorp press it has to be the truth! But there again, with 747 Kev not being home that much to make a valid observation, his spin doctors would be feeding him the genuine lines! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 we can only assume (and it is an assumption) that it was for financial reasons purely. Almost guaranteed, Andy. UK Government agencies (and, I assume, Australian ones) are bound by very tight procurement rules designed to ensure that there is no "dirty dealing" on the one hand and, on the other, that the taxpayer gets value for money. Without going into the full details of this, it is perhaps sufficient to say that a possible supplier may be excluded from a tendering process on technical grounds (i.e. there is evidence that they could not do the job - I doubt John Hartley Enterprises Ltd would win a ship-building contract, for instance). However, once a list of possible tenderers has been agreed and tenders invited, it is very difficult for a procurement mnager to not accept the lowest of what will have been a sealed bid process. I have to say that I think that is entirely the right way for public bodies to proceed - most of the time it works in everyone's interest; occasionally it doesnt. As to whether I tend to believe a newspaper report or the statements of CWGC's representative is another matter which I'm not going to get into, except to say that it would be very, very worrying if an independnent body such as CWGC was telling porkies. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auimfo Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 I don't think it's a matter of anyone telling lies John, just that we have two sets of 'spin' based on the same set of circumstances. You're right about the tender process but I sometimes wonder whether the old adage "you get what you pay for" has been totally forgotten. Cheers, Tim L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevem49 Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 I was amazed that a time limit was imposed at all. After 90 odd years, I would prefer it done correctly no matter how long it took. As for who I believe, well, err ...... Put it this way - a recent report in a newspaper mentioned my granddaughter winning an orienteering race - it began 'He is the youngest........' sm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topsey1234 Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 I was amazed that a time limit was imposed at all. After 90 odd years, I would prefer it done correctly no matter how long it took. As for who I believe, well, err ...... Put it this way - a recent report in a newspaper mentioned my granddaughter winning an orienteering race - it began 'He is the youngest........' sm I think it also worth reading todays update on the CWGC website on their blog page It now says nearly 100 individuals have been recovered- link below. It also talks about hand excavation and gives pictures of items recovered. All remains in Grave 2 has been recovered, Grave 1 by the end of next week, Graves 3 and 4 have been started. (How many graves were there to be excavated?). If the Oxford team has experience in such places as Bosnia they will be knowledgeable in whats required. From whats been posted today there does seem to be little evidence to show thats its either rushed or that artefacts are not being recovered too to assist in identification. http://www.cwgc.org/fromelles/blog/?p=373 Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 I sometimes wonder whether the old adage "you get what you pay for" has been totally forgotten. Tim You may be right, mate. In my last but one job before I retired I was the procurement manager for the local Probation Service, so have some years of experience. All you can do is write the specification for the contract to the best of your ability and invite the tenders. It is rare, on a sealed bid contract, that you would ever take other than the lowest bid. I can only recall doing it once in something like 10 years - it was a contract where we'd asked tenderers to also specify how many staffing hours they were going to devote to the work and we concluded it just couldnt be done in the time, so went for next cheapest. In this one, I think the cost differential is around 5% between the two lowest so I am not at all surprised that the lowest won it. Any buyer (even one privately favouring the other contractor) would have been hard pushed to have justified any other decision. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphin Posted 7 July , 2009 Share Posted 7 July , 2009 You're right about the tender process but I sometimes wonder whether the old adage "you get what you pay for" has been totally forgotten. Tim For some reason, I suspect that there was someone in the Department of Defence who had a vision of him or her self sitting before the Senate Estimates Committee and trying to think of an answer to the question "Why didn't you choose the cheapest tenderer?" Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 8 July , 2009 Share Posted 8 July , 2009 And the enterprise was thrown into confusion by there being more rain than expected - where have I heard that before! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now