Referral of inquiry
Terms of Reference
Conduct of inquiry
   Submissions, hearings and additional information
   Key documents
Scope and structure of report
Potential matters of parliamentary privilege
Acknowledgments
Note on references

PART I
BACKGROUND TO THE TENDER

The delivery of air sustainment services to the MEAO
   The move to a single contract for air sustainment services from 2005
   Re-test the market in 2009
   The nature of the Australian air charter industry
   Controversies associated with previous air sustainment contracts
Companies involved in the 2010 tender process
   Strategic Aviation Pty Ltd
   Adagold Aviation Pty Ltd
   Hi Fly Transportes Aereos, SA
Individuals involved in the 2010 tender process
   Mr Shaun Aisen, Strategic
   Major David Charlton
   Relationship between Mr Aisen and Major Charlton
   Mr Mark Clark, Adagold
Conclusion

PART II
FACTUAL NARRATIVE OF EVENTS

The lead-up to the tender
   Decision to re-test the market
   Preparation for re-tender
   Establishment of the Air Transport Standing Offer Panel
   The Air Transport Deed of Standing Offer
   Development of the procurement strategy
   Consideration of probity issues in the tender planning stage
   Contemporaneous events during the lead-up to the tender
The approach to market
   The RFT—AO/014/09–10
   Preliminary probity concerns
   Industry briefing
   Contemporaneous events during the tender response period
Tenders close and evaluation
   Evaluation criteria and process
   Conflict of interest management
   Confidentiality
   Probity risk management during the tender evaluation stage
   Identification of preferred tenderer and the source evaluation report (SER)
Conclusion

Complaints about the tender process
   Conflicts of interest and confidentiality
   The tender specifications
   Adagold's fitness and propriety to contract with the Commonwealth
Investigation of complaints
Conclusion

AFCD review
   Scope and methodology
   Key findings
   Deficiencies in the tender process
   Review limitations
The PwC review
   Engagement
   Methodology
   Findings and AFCD's response
   Limitations
Conclusion

Correspondence with Strategic on completion of the internal review
Consideration of internal review findings
Commissioning external reviews
Deloitte review
   Terms of engagement
   Methodology
   Key findings
AGS Review
   Terms of engagement
   Methodology
   Key findings
Allegations concerning the 2005 tender and AFP investigation
Defence responses to the external review findings
Limitations of the external reviews
   Limitations on the AGS Review
Conclusion

Awarding of contract
Performance of contract
   Contractual performance management
   Compliance with tender specifications
Lessons learned
   Reforms to Defence procurement practices
   Reforms to conflict of interest management policies
Conclusion

PART III
COMMITTEE'S CONSIDERATION OF THE EVIDENCE

The committee's approach to assessing adequacy and appropriateness
   Achieving the objectives of good probity management
   The scope of the committee's findings and recommendations
Areas for improvements
The reviews and the reliance on their findings
Conclusion

Terms of reference
   Matters of concern
   Probity risk management
The appointment of an independent probity advisor to all Commonwealth aviation contracts
   Terms of reference

   Defence policies on the disclosure and management of conflicts of interest
   The contractual management of conflicts of interest
   Adherence to risk management measures documented in the tender evaluation plan
Conclusion

Decision to re-tender, specifications and timeframe
   The evidence
Areas for improvement—documentation, consultation and certification
   Procurement Planning
   Communication with potential tenderers
   Tender evaluation
Conclusion

Due diligence on tender respondents
   Matters of concern
   Fit and proper persons
   Financial and commercial capacity
   Capacity to deliver the contracted services to the requisite quality and standard
   Independent, expert scrutiny and continuing monitoring
Broader application of the committee's recommendations
Conclusion