Message from the Fire Services Implementation Monitor, the Hon. Niall Blair
I am pleased to present to you my fourth annual report on the progress made by the Country Fire Authority, Fire Rescue Victoria, the Firefighters Registration Board and the Department of Justice and Community Safety in implementing the government’s Fire Services Reform Implementation Plan. This report brings together my observations and analysis on the efforts of Victoria’s fire services to implement the Government’s vision for a modern and interoperable fire service.
My assessment is based on the information provided to me by agencies and my observations in the governance meetings I attend. I’ve also had conversations with operational staff and volunteers who have contacted me to share some of the reform-related challenges they face. I am grateful to everyone who has taken the time to discuss their experiences of the reform as it influences their day-to-day professional lives.
Based on my observations, years one and two of the reform involved significant work by agencies to understand the structure of the reforms, commencing the transition to the new model and efforts to define complementary fire services. Unfortunately, the momentum for change slowed during years three and four, which should have been key periods of time when actions central to the reform were developed and implemented. I am concerned about the barriers behind the decline in pace and the lack of a clear plan or pathway for resolution.
While I have witnessed agencies working hard to progress actions in the implementation plan during and post the reporting period, I have also observed a concerning and frustratingly poor use of time and resources. Agency decision-making forums, where options to pursue actions are canvassed, have operated poorly or not at all and agencies have therefore failed to capitalise on opportunities to drive important interoperability initiatives and deliver public value.
I am cognisant that the complex industrial environment within which fire services are operating is a key impediment to delivering the reform. I believe the well-documented insights presented in the recent IBAC report on Operation Turton, where the damaging impacts of the United Firefighters Union on efforts to drive change in the former Metropolitan Fire Brigade (MFB) are explored, continue to dominate decision-making and day-to-day operations of FRV and its ability to work with other fire agencies. The ‘consult and agree’ clause in FRV’s enterprise agreement for operational staff, which previously applied to MFB staff, disables the ability of management to implement policies without reaching consensus with the Union. The evidence provided to IBAC by former MFB executives on this matter aligns with the information my office has received about the long delays and barriers caused by this clause. My office has also received evidence of industrial action impacting CFA activities, particularly in co-located stations. This influence is hindering the completion of key actions underpinning the implementation plan, impacting operations and damaging the culture of the agencies and morale on the ground.
The secondment arrangement between FRV and CFA is another key and obvious example of where the ‘consult and agree’ requirement is impeding agency interoperability and contributing to operational challenges such as the vacancy and relief issues experienced by CFA. It is very disappointing that after four years of work to progress the reforms, guidelines for the everyday working of secondees, like OHS reporting, dispute and grievance resolution and relief management are not completed. Indeed, after four years, the only clear development in relation to secondees is the unanimous view held by stakeholders that the secondment agreement, as originally envisioned, is unlikely to be fully realised in the current industrial environment.
I share this view and believe that the future success of the secondment arrangement is now out of the hands of FRV and CFA. They have done all that they can do, in good faith, to have it successfully implemented and now must wait for the UFU to decide if they will allow the remaining issues to be resolved. The industrial environment and legislative limitations will curtail any further attempts to implement the secondment model, and the effort to try and work around these impediments does not present a cost-effective return. Something must change.
Indeed, from the information that I have gathered and reported on, it is clear the implementation of the reform is at a crossroad. Agencies can continue to work within the parameters that have frustrated progress for the past four years or look for new ways to get things done. It is nonsensical to expect different and better outcomes from the same approaches to completing actions in the implementation plan that have been adopted so far. I believe that if Victorian fire agencies do not find new approaches to completing reform actions, there is a strong risk that the Year Two to Five Fire Services Reform Implementation Plan actions will not be completed by June 2025.
The reform and the drivers behind the much-needed changes are warranted and can be clearly identified in different parts of Victoria. I hope it is clear from this report that agencies must commit to founding all decision-making on joint matters on the principles of complementary fire services. Most importantly, I believe that merely completing actions will not necessarily directly translate to the desired outcomes for this reform. The end goal extends further than the implementation plan alone.
Ultimately, this is about moving towards a modern and interoperable fire service that is capable of responding to Victoria’s emerging climactic conditions and changing risk profile. The forecast for the coming fire season is very concerning and could expose the reform-related issues being experienced on the ground, which go beyond the implementation plan actions alone.
Indeed, during this reporting period, the ongoing CFA vacancy and relief issues, reports of the nearest and most appropriate appliance not being dispatched to emergencies, and a broad range of secondment challenges, dominated the reports to my office and my attention as an observer in interagency meetings. Interestingly, there is little scope for these issues to be reported against the reform implementation plan actions. I can only pursue reports on these issues by stepping outside of the Year 2-5 implementation plan actions to investigate matters from the lens of complementary fire services. I will report my findings on these matters in due course.
Creating true interoperability of services requires the commitment to address the known reform challenges in a way that prioritises community outcomes, which could in turn guide the appropriate and effective use of agencies’ resources. Completing actions in the implementation plan will lead to some benefits to the Victorian community, but the original and most crucial intent of complementary fire services will be lost if the focus continues to be on ticking off actions that do not go to the heart of the challenges that are reported to me regularly.
As we enter the fifth year of implementation, I trust the reflections and findings in this report will support agencies to find new solutions to address these systemic issues and barriers to achieve meaningful and long-lasting change.
Updated