It’s not just UK public sector procurement that can sometimes raise eyebrows. We received another article fromthePhantom CPOrecently, addressing a highly controversial issue in Australia, where thegovernment is being criticised for apparently planning to give a grant of $444million to a tiny charity to carry out conservation work on the Great Barrier Reef. Here, the Phantom argues both sides of the story based on how the reports suggest the procurement process is being handled - which side do you think wins out?
-------
No tender process for $444m Great Barrier Reef grant, Senate hearing told. Department says it approached the non-profit group just weeks before the budget and had still not signed an agreement.
“政府进程的支持者”希望这将是一个事实反应：The discussion with the non-profit group was exploratory. We researched their work and their technical accreditations are evidence of their experience in this field.
我们将寻求与本技术空间中其他非营利性的类似探索性讨论，也与Reef Trust和海洋公园权威。所有这些机构都是这种过程中的相关利益相关者。我们将寻求最优惠的资金价值，并与所有的建议和投入考虑进行任何最终决定。我们将进行全面的技术和能力审查，我们将成为公众。这将是透明的，因为你会合理期待。
“愤世嫉俗”将从举报中得出以下情况：政府中的有人高级舒适，“伟大的障碍珊瑚基础”。这个人希望基础拥有鞋面，并且首先故意讲述它们。也知道，如果这个消息进入公众，我们总是可以说这是很早的，我们将与他人咨询（我们将咨询，但没有任何意图向任何人授予任何人，而是我们早期的任何人最喜欢的人）。然后我们可以总是说他们是最好的资格和最适合我们所有的选择。如果有人想看到评估选择表，我们总是可以敲出一个匹配我们真正想要的结果的快速。
---------
“政府宣布了44400万美元Great Barrier ReefFoundation remains an “intention” – there is still no agreement between the foundation and the Department of Environment and Energy, a Senate estimates hearing has heard. Labour, the Greens and crossbench senators spent hours grilling the government on Monday on what due diligence was done before the environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, announced the grant to the foundation on 29 April.
斯蒂芬·奥克斯（Stephen Oxley）在该部门的遗产秘书，珊瑚礁和海洋部门，在周一下午讲述了听证会，政府宣布“它有意进入这一伙伴关系”，现在正在确定是否可以建立它。他说，政府首次在4月初接近基金会“。
Supporter: He announced theintention获得赠款可用。不是将授予谁。4月份的讨论是探索性的，有助于政府估计估计，以确保其最终有效性。其他人已经见过面了并寻求类似的建议。
愤世嫉俗者：这是如此典型的政治家。他们有他们的最爱，他们不关心真正的尽职调查或客观的决策。他们知道他们想要的结果，他们向公共部门工作人员提供指示，使得这一结果发生。他们首选的结果是由各种各样的政治利益驱动，满足一个应该是一个从未应该被制定的承诺，作为过去的利益，或者在未来的某个时间征收他们可以召唤的义务，and even (sadly) as we’ve seen before, for their own personal gain or profit.
-----------
“我们正在一个过程中，政府和伟大的障碍礁基金会表示打算进入伙伴关系协议，”奥克斯利说。“我们现在正在经历完全全面的尽职调查过程，我们得出了是否可以完全完善，因为想要更好的话。”
Supporter: They will not be the only organisation that will be considered. Our due diligence is not just with one organisation.
Cynic: So Mr Oxley admits they are only talking to one organisation and ‘hope to consummate’ the deal. All this without an equal amount of due diligence with others who may be more qualified to do the work.
-------
芬兰普拉特省秘书告诉听证会没有投标或授予资金的申请程序，该基础已被描述为“像赢得乐透”。他和部长Simon Birmingham在一再被问及政府如何达成决定时没有详细说明，即基金会是管理资金的适当车辆。
Labour (opposition) senatorKristina Keneallysaid “I’ve got to say with the greatest of respect and as someone who has overseen a number of these processes at state government level, I cannot imagine, ever, a government without a competitive or open process or some type of public service comparator just blithely awarding nearly half a billion dollars to an organisation that has six full-time employees,” she said.
Cynic: Oh great, they have 6 employees … that's $74 M each!
-----
Birmingham said the government had not blithely awarded the funding to the foundation. “The government is in negotiations with the foundation and discussions with the foundation about precisely how the funding will be used,” he said. “There will be clear conditions around that as has been made obvious in evidence to the committee already.”
Supporter: As mentioned above, there is no decision made that they will receive this grant. This is an error in reporting by the newspaper. We will conduct a full technical and competence review and we will make that public. It will be transparent, as you would reasonably expect.
Cynic: Really???
（感谢幻影CPO - 我们会在这种情况下观看令人兴趣的情况！）
讨论这一点：