The proposed fire team reshuffle set to trim a quarter of (vacant) roles

Welcome to Brisbane Times’ Queensland public sector column, Public Circus. This week: a shake-up for some in the Fire Department, free-text feedback and child safety watchdog cash questions.

The phrase “proposed organisational change” is enough to raise the hackles of most working in a place large enough to support such an occasional reshuffling.

Particularly in an environment, across the Queensland public sector, with agencies scratching for all the cash they can. So spare a thought for some of the folks over in Commissioner Steve Smith’s Queensland Fire Department.

The change in question involves the Assets Services team within chief operating officer Dr Rebecca Denning’s Strategy and Corporate Services division, responsible for things including the vehicle fleet, uniforms, logistics, capital works and building management.

Not insignificant stuff to ensure those holding the literal hose can do the work they need to do when a house, business, or large swathe of the state is in flames.

So what’s on the cards? An internal document outlining the proposal, which has found its way to the Circus tent, puts the headline at 13 vacant roles being “removed” from the 47-person organisational chart of the group under executive director Adam Green.

“It has been identified that these roles may no longer be required, and other identified roles have been varied to accommodate the duties and responsibilities of the 13 vacant positions,” the proposal states. A tale almost as old as time itself.

The change is said to stem from a recently consulted Asset Operating Model shift, and will also result in some subsequent reshuffling of the team – including the relocation of multiple roles from Kedron, and even one from Caloundra, to the department’s shiny new Albion HQ.

While the shake-up is out for the required consultation with staff and their union (Together) as we write this, one Circusgoer has given far from a glowing review of consultation efforts to-date.

A final proposed “way forward” is due to be laid out by mid-October. It’s all certainly one way to find the “efficiencies and cost savings” Smith flagged in an all-staff email back in April amid this column’s revelations of new (not quite) hiring freeze efforts.

At that stage, he assured the push was happening at “all levels”, with even a review of the staffing model “across the executive’s offices” said to be underway.

We’ve reached out to the department’s media team for an explanation of the asset team proposal – and an update on that executive review – but were yet to get a response.

Free-text feedback flows in Circus’ own Working for Queensland callout

Public Circus’ inaugural Working for Queensland survey callout has yielded a number of responses already, so we figured we’d share some initial anonymous (free-text) feedback.

The most curious being the word from one tipster that they had got to the end of a Department of Housing and Public Works survey to find … no free-text feedback sections.

A spokesperson for the department confirmed this to have been the case – and noted it had been so since 2024.

“The department includes specific agency-related questions which are designed to gather information and feedback which aligns to the department’s strategic direction and to support us measuring performance,” the spinner said in a statement.

Another wondered whether the public airing of pointed responses to such prompts, as part of CFMEU inquiry evidence from former Office of Industrial Relations boss Kym Bancroft, may have rattled some current agency chiefs likely to have them land in their inboxes.

One former senior manager described the results of the trauma dump as “exactly that … for those who receive it”, suggesting a new section for anyone who answered yes to “are you willing to leave” with a spot to upload your CV and details for a recruiter.

There was also the concern raised that the survey could be completed as many times (and under whatever persona) as desired by those with an axe to grind or too much time on their hands – claiming one colleague filled it in 23 times one year.

“Then the executive implement action plans to address low score areas (clue, no action plan will give the whingers a promotion they don’t deserve or a workload that is significantly lower than what a competent person can complete etc) and then wonder why most staff view the survey with complete derision with the lowest score (reliably every year) for, you guessed it, the executive,” a fourth respondent said.

While the official surveys – and the reminders to fill them out – might end this week, Circus takes a rolling approach to anyone wishing to vent anonymously to us. So keep it coming below.

Child safety ‘intelligence hub’ funding sits outside new watchdog budget

Parliamentary consideration of the state’s proposed new child safety watchdog got under way last week, with a committee briefing from Department of Justice figures.

While they largely told us what we already knew about the merged mega commission set to replace the Queensland Family and Child Commission, there was a sliver of new detail.

Beyond the fact that work is still very much ongoing to figure out how many folks from agencies beyond Luke Twyford’s QFCC will be seconded into its replacement next year, responses to two questions taken on notice get to some of the pointier questions remaining.

The first was how much of the $255 million headline figure from Attorney-General Deb Frecklington’s (albeit qualified) announcement back in June is set to be allocated for staffing and resources.

According to the department’s response, published on Monday, that entire figure and the $74 million recurring funding across this and each of the next three financial years will be “primarily” set aside for such purposes.

“Additional resourcing for the new child safeguarding intelligence hub function is subject to further consideration by government and will be informed by the design work, which has commenced,” the department said.

As you might imagine, we’ve sung out to Frecklington’s office for some clarification on this rather major detail, and will report back if and when we get it.

Another response addressed the question of what other entities, if any, were subject to similar ministerial powers which will allow the dismissal of a new commissioner or their deputies for no reason.

While noting it was a “policy decision made by government”, the department noted this reflected the “high level of public trust in these roles and their critical importance in delivering a robust child safeguarding system in Queensland”.

And after scouring state laws for other examples, the department found six cohorts also facing no-cause dismissal: Safe Food board members, the Racing Queensland chair, deputy chair or chief executive, hospital and health board members, and the director of Forensic Science Queensland.

Sure. (And we’ll ignore another government bill this year which removed such powers over Stadium’s Queensland board members because the power “does not … align with fundamental legislative principles”.)

But on Circus’ reading of the Forensic Science side of things, that power does not, in fact, exist there. While a director can be removed at any time on the minister’s recommendation, there are specific reasons such a call can be made – none of which include, well, “none”.