The Fly-In Regulator: A Symbol of Misplaced Priorities in Child Safety Reform?
There’s something deeply unsettling about the appointment of Adam Fennessy as Victoria’s interim child safety regulator. On the surface, it’s a bureaucratic decision—a man with a solid resume takes on a critical role. But dig a little deeper, and it becomes a case study in how governments can miss the forest for the trees.
The Setup: A Role That Demands More Than Just Expertise
Victoria’s childcare sector has been in crisis. The appointment of a regulator to overhaul it was supposed to signal a new era of accountability and safety. Enter Adam Fennessy, a well-regarded bureaucrat with a history in environmental policy. On paper, he’s competent. But here’s the catch: he’s based in Brisbane, commuting to Melbourne while juggling a marathon training schedule and a seemingly active social life in Queensland.
Personally, I think this raises a deeper question: What does it say about the government’s commitment to child safety when the person tasked with leading this reform is essentially a part-time resident? It’s not just about Fennessy’s qualifications—it’s about the optics and the message it sends.
The Optics: A Part-Time Commitment for a Full-Time Crisis
What makes this particularly fascinating is the contrast between the gravity of the role and the casualness of Fennessy’s arrangement. Child safety isn’t a 9-to-5 job; it’s a 24/7 responsibility. Yet, Fennessy’s Strava posts—detailing his runs in Brisbane and his attendance at football games—paint a picture of someone whose priorities seem divided.
From my perspective, this isn’t just about Fennessy’s personal choices. It’s about the government’s decision to appoint someone who, by his own admission, won’t be applying for the permanent role because he can’t relocate. If you take a step back and think about it, this feels like a stopgap solution for a problem that demands long-term, unwavering focus.
The Broader Trend: FIFO Leadership in Public Service
This isn’t the first time Victoria has faced criticism over fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) leaders. Last year, the CEO of the Suburban Rail Loop project faced similar scrutiny for commuting from Queensland. What this really suggests is a troubling pattern: the government’s willingness to prioritize expertise over local presence, even in roles that demand deep community engagement.
One thing that immediately stands out is how this approach undermines public trust. When leaders aren’t physically present, it’s hard for the community to see them as fully invested. In a sector like childcare, where trust has already been shattered by past failures, this is a risky gamble.
The Expertise vs. Presence Debate: A False Dichotomy?
Supporters of Fennessy’s appointment argue that his bureaucratic experience outweighs his lack of presence. But here’s where many people don’t realize the full picture: child safety isn’t just about managing systems—it’s about understanding the nuances of the sector, building relationships, and being accessible to those on the ground.
A detail that I find especially interesting is the criticism from within the sector. Sources have pointed out that Fennessy has no background in early childhood policy. While he’s undoubtedly skilled, this role requires more than generic bureaucratic expertise. It requires a deep understanding of the unique challenges facing childcare providers and the families they serve.
The Future: A Permanent Fix for a Temporary Problem?
The government has assured that a permanent, Victorian-based regulator will be appointed soon. But the damage may already be done. The interim period is critical for setting the tone and direction of the reform. With Fennessy’s tenure, there’s a risk that the foundation being laid is shaky at best.
If you ask me, this situation highlights a broader issue in public service recruitment: the tendency to prioritize resumes over real-world fit. In my opinion, the next regulator needs to be more than just qualified—they need to be embedded in the community, committed to the cause, and visible in their leadership.
Final Thoughts: A Missed Opportunity?
The appointment of Adam Fennessy feels like a missed opportunity. At a time when Victoria’s childcare sector desperately needs strong, focused leadership, the government has opted for a solution that feels half-hearted.
What many people don’t realize is that leadership isn’t just about what you do—it’s about what you symbolize. In this case, Fennessy’s appointment symbolizes a government that’s willing to cut corners, even when it comes to the safety of its most vulnerable citizens.
If there’s one takeaway from this saga, it’s this: child safety reform can’t be a part-time job. It demands full-time commitment, not just from the regulator, but from the government that appoints them. Anything less is a disservice to the children and families who rely on it.
