Imagine a system designed to protect vulnerable children, only to discover it’s riddled with flaws that could put thousands at risk. That’s the chilling reality in Queensland, where a botched $183 million child safety IT system, Unify, has sparked outrage and raised serious questions about accountability. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was this a case of systemic failure, or did someone drop the ball? Let’s dive in.
Last October, the LNP government commissioned an independent audit of Unify, conducted by Deloitte. The findings were alarming. The system, which went live in April, had been stripped of critical features in late 2023, including the ability to monitor individualized placements and supports. This left caseworkers struggling to access vital data, such as family roles and the source of harm—information that could mean the difference between safety and danger for a child. And this is the part most people miss: The audit revealed that users faced unexpected shutdowns, lost hours of work, and had to rely on exact name spellings for searches, with no option to search by address. Talk about a recipe for inefficiency and risk.
Child Safety Minister Amanda Camm has found herself at the center of the storm. She claims she was never briefed about the system’s reduced scope or its critical issues before it launched. “I had assurances from senior staff that the system was ready,” she said, adding that the audit findings were “damning.” But her defense hasn’t stopped the Labor opposition from accusing her of shifting blame. Shadow Attorney-General Meaghan Scanlon bluntly stated, “Amanda Camm is the person who turned this system on. She can’t hide from that responsibility.”
Here’s the kicker: Documents obtained under Right to Information reveal that Director-General Belinda Drew had flagged issues with Unify as early as June 4, noting staff dissatisfaction and inadequate training. The very next day, Drew met with Camm. Yet, Camm insists she was unaware of the system’s flaws. Is this a case of poor communication, or something more deliberate? It’s a question that’s sure to spark debate.
The government has announced a remedial plan, promising to publish operational data within a month and stabilize the system within six months. But for many, the damage is already done. “Time is critical when assessing risk to children,” Camm acknowledged, adding that the system’s failures had indeed increased that risk during its rollout.
Now, here’s a thought-provoking question for you: Should ministers be held personally accountable when systems under their watch fail so spectacularly? Or is it fair to blame bureaucratic red tape and communication breakdowns? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is one discussion that’s far from over.
