I am a bit confused. The intro seems to suggest there is a problem with book keeping, i.e. accounting for assets and expenses. That's kind of a problem. But then most of the article is about programmes being over budget.
When dealing with a large project, whether it is a new plane, a big infrastructure, anything large and unique, you should take any budget with a big pinch of salt, there is no way anyone can predict precisely how a complex project, that involves a lot of research, millions of moving pieces, is going to cost from the outset. A ship programme being 10% over budget doesn't seem particularly problematic to me. F35 is a different story.
It is as if the same people who can't do proper accounting now confuse the difference between accounting and budgeting.
Issue with books is not budget overruns but that money is unaccounted for. Money has somehow vanished. Where did it go? Why can't they figure out such a simple thing? Use double-entry book-keeping. Money that comes from somewhere must go somewhere. This suggests they/somebody don't want to record in books where the money went. Smells like corruption and criminality. Who got the money?
> When dealing with a large project, whether it is a new plane, a big infrastructure, anything large and unique, you should take any budget with a big pinch of salt, there is no way anyone can predict precisely how a complex project, that involves a lot of research, millions of moving pieces, is going to cost from the outset.
You are talking about uncertainty -- e.g. risk. But that should lead you to overestimate as often as you underestimate so that you're average is on target but there is wide variation in individual results. If there is a systemic bias causing you to underestimate costs consistently, then you cannot blame uncertainty for that.
When dealing with a large project, whether it is a new plane, a big infrastructure, anything large and unique, you should take any budget with a big pinch of salt, there is no way anyone can predict precisely how a complex project, that involves a lot of research, millions of moving pieces, is going to cost from the outset. A ship programme being 10% over budget doesn't seem particularly problematic to me. F35 is a different story.