‘Fragile and fractured’: Why the NSW children’s guardian was sacked

The NSW children’s guardian has been sacked for “misbehaviour” after a report found he “seriously breached” standards expected of his office, oversaw a psychologically unsafe workplace, failed to disclose a long-term relationship and inappropriately intervened in a matter where he had a conflict of interest.

After an eight-month investigation, commissioner Kate Eastman, SC, handed down her report into the Office of the Children’s Guardian after serious allegations were levelled against Steve Kinmond, who had served in the role since January 2023.

Families Minister Kate Washington released the report of the special ministerial inquiry into the workplace culture of the Office of the Children’s Guardian on Wednesday.

She said Kinmond had been dismissed, noting his failure to disclose a significant conflict of interest.

Kinmond stood aside in early March after complaints were made about an inappropriate office baby shower. In July, further allegations of staff misconduct emerged. Eastman’s report had been due in June but was pushed back because of the extent of the information received.

“Mr Steve Kinmond has been removed from his position as children’s guardian by the lieutenant governor for misbehaviour. The report found that the children’s guardian had seriously breached expected standards as a regulator and an independent statutory officer,” Washington said in parliament.

The NSW Office of the Children’s Guardian has 278 people who manage all Working With Children Check (WWCC) processes, including applications, renewals, compliance, risk assessment and monitoring.

Eastman found Kinmond had been in a “personal relationship” with someone known in the report as “Person A”, a senior consultant at the Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies, a not-for-profit organisation in the industry he and his office regulated.

After being asked about the potential conflict, the report stated that Kinmond said, “people knew” about the relationship “because we worked together for ages and people know things”.

“The guardian’s failure to turn his mind [to] the risk of a conflict when he commenced in January 2023 shows poor judgment and leadership,” the report found.

The report details Kinmond’s response to the allegations, including that he rejected the suggestion he should have disclosed the relationship. He said while Person A “might deal with matters” related to the agency’s child safe scheme, “this isn’t my understanding of the work that they normally undertake”.

In a statement to the Herald, Kinmond said there were no examples of an actual conflict provided and “in the small number of occasions” where there was a potential conflict, “it was appropriately managed”.

The inquiry also found Kinmond had inappropriately intervened in a WWCC for someone named “Person B” after the Office of the Children’s Guardian’s legal advice determined the check should not be granted. Despite extensive contact between Kinmond and Person B, the relationship was not disclosed.

Phone records provided to the inquiry revealed 357 text messages and 90 outbound calls totalling six hours and 22 minutes across business hours, evenings and weekends were made over the six weeks during which Person B’s application was being considered.

“His conduct was a significant transgression of appropriate and proper boundaries that may be deleterious to Person B’s interests and rights and also to the interests, reputation and integrity of OCG,” the report found.

Kinmond rejected the suggestion his intervention in the WWCC matter was inappropriate, saying his “relationship with the applicant was purely professional in nature” and his decision to grant the clearance was “consistent with what the law required”.

The report also found the workplace culture under Kinmond was unsafe, “fragile and fractured”.

Eastman found the Office of the Children’s Guardian “is not a psychologically safe workplace” and “there is a silence about the depth and extent to which other employees experienced a workplace culture that lacks psychological safety, and for some the experience of vicarious trauma is baked into the culture”.

The inquiry commissioner found there were aspects of Kinmond’s leadership that directly contributed to the OCG having a poor workplace culture and failing to develop and maintain a psychologically safe workplace environment and eliminating the risks of vicarious trauma.

A staff member told the inquiry: “The culture has changed dramatically since Steve Kinmond became the children’s guardian.”

The inquiry was highly critical of Kinmond’s decision to forward a copy of a sensitive letter, which had been sent to Washington’s chief of staff, to all Office of the Children’s Guardian employees. In the nine pages of correspondence about why the office would be unable to meet existing demand, Kinmond argued he would need to reduce staff or operating costs.

“The guardian said the reason for distributing the letter to all OCG employees was because they had an ‘entitlement or right to know’. He was unable to identify any source of this claimed entitlement or right to know. There is no OCG policy that confers such a ‘right’,” the report found.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.