Public Eye: Public servants don't call it hotdesking, more UFO guys, Richard Marles not happy about $800,000 office

Just don't say the word "hotdesking".

You see, a government agency does not simply hotdesk, a government agency transitions to "flexible, activity-based workspaces".

That's what health is doing as part of its "New Ways of Working (NWOW)" program.

Public servants in the department are moving to flexible seating within their teams, or "neighbourhoods", as the department calls it.

Nwow, try explaining that difference to bureaucrats who are cramming years of debris into lockers and staking out the best spot in their neighbourhood.

After asking every government department, as well as Services Australia and the Australian Taxation Office, whether or not their staff hotdesk, Public Sector Informant has learnt the term is definitely out in 2023.

What's in? "Flexible seating", "desk-sharing arrangements" and "agile working", but not hotdesking.

"We have not implemented 'hot desking' arrangements," a spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry said.

"We are not implementing 'hot desking' arrangements at any of our sites."

The department instead has flexible seating at its new Civic Quarter 2 building on Northbourne Avenue, but staff can request fixed seats for a variety of reasons.

The Department of Defence is also definitely not hotdesking.

They are, of course, just "promoting a shift from traditional fixed work points to modern activity-based workspaces, which better promote flexibility, collaboration and efficiency".

Whatever you call it, fixed seating is becoming less common across departments in Canberra, with the complete findings of our deep dive to be published on Tuesday.

And while we have enjoyed the jargon, the authors of this column do understand why departments may consider the issue as contentious.

We can reveal hot desking is in place at The Canberra Times office, where favoured desks have quickly emerged, and the stakes are high to nab them first.

Happy agile working everyone!

As truth seekers ourselves, we've delved a few times into what the Department of Defence is doing about unidentified aerial phenomena locally.

Now before you scoff, like Senator Penny Wong in a November estimates hearing, we're not talking about little green guys racing around the skies.

The issue again gained traction last month after a series of reports of "spy balloons" being shot out of the sky dominated headlines.

But even if that wasn't the case, the answer from Defence would be short: nothing.

READ MORE PUBLIC SERVICE NEWS:

The Royal Australian Air Force actually canned any inquiries into sightings way back in 1996 and haven't looked back (or up) since.

Well, that reality has not been lost on some fanatics out there, including one that made sure to email Senator Wong shortly after her estimates appearance.

The UFO guy implored the Foreign Affairs Minister to champion changes within Australia to "reveal the truth" and reestablish a taskforce capable of investigating sightings.

Since nothing's really happened, we're guessing it's still in the Senator's unread folder.

A diligent r/Canberra redditor has called for the forum to ban people posting details about their security clearance.

Last month, Australia's top spy called out "reckless" and "unprofessional" public servants for posting their security clearances on social media.

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation head Mike Burgess said it was disappointing security professionals would behave this way in his annual threat assessment.

Now a Canberran wants the subreddit to police posts which reveal security clearances.

"Not only is it a direct threat to the user's own security, but also Australia's," the user wrote.

"Surely the mods could chip in for some patriotism and ban - or do something to - accounts which post about having/obtaining security clearances?"

Naturally, responses devolved. We'll allow you to peruse them at your own leisure.

New details of the Department of Defence's $800,000 mea culpa have emerged.

We reported last year Defence Minister Richard Marles refused to move into a brand new executive suite Defence officials had refurbished for him. But, why? You might be thinking.

Well, Mr Marles' office wasn't actually asked whether they wanted it, nor were they told it was happening.

And the final bill amounted to $800,000, which certainly wasn't a good look for the new government.

A sternly-worded email from the minister's chief of staff to Defence secretary Greg Moriarty has now surfaced in the freedom of information disclosure logs.

Marles' number one, Jo Tarnawsky, told the top Defence official she had been alarmed to find out a brand new office for her boss had been constructed through a question on notice in October last year.

"The Deputy Prime Minister does not need nor did he request an office be purpose-built for him or any other minister," she wrote.

"Defence unilaterally deciding to relocate this signage is not a reason to take occupancy of a space that far exceeds the requirements of the Deputy Prime Minister.

"Effective economic management and appropriate allocation of Commonwealth resources is the cornerstone of this government's policy mandate."

Mr Moriarty responded a few days later to confirm Mr Marles' office hadn't been briefed on the project that first began under the former Coalition government and started in April 2022.

He also acknowledged Mr Marles was not budging from his level two office to the fresh level five digs, adding it would now be used as a "flexible work space for Defence's senior leadership team and others such as prominent external reviewers".

Internal emails also released through the freedom of information request show discussions about what types of coat racks and cabinets - presumably for the minister's large snow globe collection - Mr Marles should have.

But of course, he was none the wiser.