Ministers want AI productivity stories. The ISM has not been amended for ChatGPT.
Pressure from above to show AI uptake. Pressure from below to maintain accreditation. The middle path is rarely the loudest one in the briefing pack.
For Australian government
Sovereign by deployment. Calm by posture.
For Commonwealth, state and local government departments and agencies. AI adoption that respects PSPF, ISM and IRAP obligations. Modernisation that survives ANAO review.
Doing AI badly here is a Senate Estimates conversation.
And doing nothing is increasingly indefensible too. The third path (sovereign, governed, on-shore) is rarely shaped by the major-vendor procurement panels.
On-shore infrastructure, governed deployment, named architects accountable.
Sovereign AI on Australian-located infrastructure. MCP servers that respect the existing classification model. Engagements built for procurement.
How the two pillars apply
In Australian government specifically.
AI adoption with on-shore guarantees
AI workflows running on infrastructure your CISO can audit and your security accreditor can sign off. No customer data leaves the Australian-located perimeter you control.
Open AI adoptionModernisation of long-running estates
Mainframe, legacy .NET and Dynamics estates run real public services. We modernise in slices that an ANAO performance audit could trace. Bridges, not bonfires.
Open modernisationEngagements built for government procurement.
Defined deliverables, named architects, sovereign deployment. The shape of engagement government departments expect.