>>63491639
>your usage of it is incorrect
you mean the Australian Govt has not started the project?

this is a common phrase used in news reporting (oh no, another -ing! shocker!) especially when reporting on government funding, which is often an ongoing long-term multi-year or even indefinite expenditure (that is, until policy is changed). you'll find it commonly used in American, British, and Australian reporting (would reportAGE suit you better?)
it is also eminently useful because it easily contrasts the ongoing Hunter project from, say, the Hobarts which no longer incur construction costs and therefore can safely be referred to using the past tense (that is, when not referring to the ongoing cost of operations)

I'm well aware that the alternative "will cost" is of course acceptable since the vast bulk of the costs are in the future
however, since costs have already been paid, the contract is locked in, cancellation penalties will apply, and every passing day racks up half a million more dollars in work, it is also quite acceptable to say this is an ongoing, CONTINUOUS expenditure

now, you're free to decry what you might consider to be a "new" change in common English grammar
(you might even have my sympathies, because heaven knows I have violent objections to much of the OED's changes these days)
chacun a son gout
but like it or not, there's ample evidence that this phrasing (OH NO!) is in common use outside the Indian subcontinent

so don't you fucking call me a jeet

Back | Go to board

Board:

/k/

Thread:

Most Expensive Destroyer Award