I’ll weigh into this, thanks Bernard!… > This sorry saga demonstrates the inability of the politicians to make > good technology decisions - they let politics override national > security. Just like the vaccine problems it's a case of too little, too late.
It’s not just that the politicians are incapable of making good technology decisions - politics always overrides national security, because it’s their job (the pollies) to balance both public interest and public appetite whilst taking advice from bureaucrats (military and civilian). It’s never simple, and the submarine program is no different to any other large-scale program. Politicians and bureaucrats love toys. They are tangible things that can help to win favour, influence (both national and international) and votes. There’s nothing particularly attractive in spending $80 billion on cyber-security instead (or climate change, god forbid), from either a voter or political perspective. But spending ridiculous amounts on expensive and attention-grabbing military objects will always win favour or induce fear in the ‘right’ places. The sub program has been doomed for some time: and has been a ‘project of concern’ for so long that it is frankly embarrassing that the plug was not pulled earlier. People may try to go over the entrails of why it was an abject failure, but it’s a wicked problem with some highly experienced people (some of who I admire greatly for their intellect and ability to make things work) all trying to solve the problem, and with no tangible solution in sight. The decision to go diesel-electric was in a large part to create jobs in a state which had previously been decimated by the failure of the car industry (so a purely political solution, which caused dismay in military circles). iT _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
