PKR claims that there is no need for a new defence system programme as the army already has one in place.
Firstly, it is alleged that the system was awarded via direct negotiations. Secondly, the army is against it as it already has a similar system in place.
The NCO programme is meant to integrate all system applications, sensors, command and control systems and weaponry that will stretch over 10 to 15 years.
The issue was first highlighted by PKR’s communication director Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad who claimed the army already has a similar system.
Nik Nazmi, who is Seri Setia state assemblyman, also alleged that the proposal to implement the new programme was rejected by majority of the Malaysian army.
Today, PKR vice-president Tian Chua claimed to have received information that the NCO programme does not have a “roadmap that locates this programme within the framework of the nation’s future defence needs”.
“Why do we need such a programme when its direction is not set from the start?” he asked
“Without any direction the total cost of the project is bound to increase,” he said at a press conference.
No transparency
Tian Chua, the Batu MP, also raised a new problem – the flawed “General Service Requirement” (GSR) that identifies all the hardware and software needs to be included in the NCO project.
He claimed the GSR was neither completed nor approved prior to the start of the project.
“This clearly shows that the project has not been subjected to the due processes of transparency and good governance.
“How can the defence ministry allow such weaknesses in governance to take place?” he asked.
Another contention was over the technical viability study for the “P4 system” or pemerintahan, pengawalan, perhubungan and perisikan (command, control, communications and intelligence).
Tian Chua claimed the “command and control” (C2) system currently being used by the defence ministry is still being tested.
“(But we) understand that Sapura is insisting on building a completely new C2 system.
“How can the ministry allow Sapura to be so insistent without taking into consideration the findings of the report?”
A formal complaint was lodged today to ask Mindef to halt the NCO project pending an inquiry.
I cannot find a reason why umno need to spend so much money on defense since there is no war here except terrorism.
ReplyDeleteIs there another lopsided project for umno goons? My Allah knew it.
the Jews. "when everything gone wrong, blame the Jews..... funny.
ReplyDeleteHarap perkara ini akan disiasat.
ReplyDeleteharap penjelasan akan diberikan..tunggu dan lihat sajalah perkembangannya nanti..
ReplyDeleteapapun, sistem pertahanan negara kita harus diperkukuhkan.
ReplyDeleteKalau macam tu sepatutnya tidak ramai PATI ada di Sabah ni. Hampeh.
ReplyDeleteSetuju dengan Damia. Sistem pertahanan negara seharusnya kukuh kerana sudah banyak duit dibelanjakan. Orang yang corrupted ni yang sebenarnya musuh negara.
ReplyDeleteMasalah yang dapat membuktikan bahawa pertahanan negara lemah adalah kadar PATI yang sangat ramai di Negara kita ini. Kenapa? Mungkin sempadan Negara tidak kuat dan senang ditembusi oleh mereka ini.
ReplyDeleteSistem NCO digunakan dikebanyakkan negara untuk melaksanakan transformasi dalam sistem ketenteraan dengan menggunakan aplikasi sistem yang akan bergantung sepenuhnya kepada peralatan komputer dan teknologi rangkaian komunikasi. projek 'Network Centric Operation' (NCO) ini dianggarkan menelan belanja RM2 bilion, menurut Pengarah Komunikasi PKR, Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.
ReplyDeleteinkuiri penuh bersabit sistem tersebut perlu dibuat sekiranya benar- benar diperlukan Angkatan Tentera Malaysia (ATM) dan jika program NCO ini benar-benar dibuktikan perlu untuk ATM, maka pemilihan pihak yang paling layak untuk melaksanakan projek ini menerusi proses tender terbuka perlu dibuat(Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad).
ReplyDeleteI found this comment from Anuar blog..
ReplyDelete""Salam, saya jurutera komunikasi Sapura yang terlibat secara langsung dengan projek GIRN. Projek NCO ini mendapat kepercayaan daripada ATM dan kerajaan kerana kita telah berjaya melaksanakan dan menguruskan projek terdahulu dengan jayanya (GIRN). Sebab itulah kerajaan mempercayai kami. Saya ingin bertanya DSAI, apakah sistem yang hampir sama itu? Hampir sama amat berbeza dengan seratus peratus sama. Umpamakan kereta Proton Saga tahun 1990, hampir sama atau seratus peratus sama dengan Proton Saga BLM tahun 2011? Tidak bukan. Kalau diberikan pilihan,mana yang lebih baik, tepuk dada tanya selera.
Usah menggunakan maklumat atau sumber yang tidak atau belum tentu berasas. Apa bukti ATM mengkritik secara menyeluruh? Tidak ada. Apa bukti Sapura tidak memiliki kebolehan teknikal? Tidak ada.
Jika Sapura, tidak mendapat projek ini, pada pandangan DSAI, siapakah yang lebih layak? MAXIS milik Ananda Krishnan? Atau DiGi milik Vincent Tan? FYI Sapura Secured Technologies adalah milik bumiputera Islam. Seharusnya projek melibatkan sekuriti diberikan kepada yang berpengalaman sahaja.""