I am often in the car around 5 p.m., having helped with the school/kinder pickup. It’s a great joy hanging out with the young’uns, so I am always in a good mood when I hit the start button.

By the end of my trip, my temper has worsened, having listened to the ABC Drive program which is now compered by Charlie Pickering – no relation of Warren. Last week, I was forced to listen to Victoria’s Child Safety Commissioner. I can’t remember her name, and I am not about to look it up. (You will be pleased to know there is also a Commissioner for Aboriginal Children and Young People in Victoria.)

The issue being discussed was whether Victoria should raise the age of criminal responsibility from 12 to 14, in line with the Victorian Labor party’s official policy. The new Premier, Ben Carroll, has been running a mile in the other direction, claiming that politicians make this type of decision, not the party.

This is a hot political topic in Victoria, with the state being the crime capital of the country. We have the highest rate of vehicle theft as well as home break-ins. One of the fastest growing industries in the state is home security systems. The firebombing of tobacco shops is also a weekly occurrence, sometimes more.

Now I’m not quite sure of the technical status of the Child Safety Commissioner – I guess she is a statutory office-holder on a fixed term. One might expect her to act in a politically neutral/ non-partisan way, but she hasn’t absorbed that message, judged by her comments.

According to Ms Commissioner, the age of criminal responsibility must immediately be raised to 14, if not older. The science tells us – always a give-away for prejudiced twaddle – that those under that age just can’t judge what is right or wrong; they cannot be held accountable. And punishing them only makes it worse by setting them up for a life of crime, interrupted by periods of incarceration.

Wow, I thought, as I motored my way home while also avoiding potholes. The lack of nuance was staggering. Surely, most 13-year-olds know the difference between right and wrong – I know I did. And what about those older villains who commission the young ones to do the crime – a bit of paid firebombing anyone? – in the knowledge that there is no penalty for those under the age of criminal responsibility.

The contribution of Ms Commissioner got me thinking about the incredible surge in the number of commissioners at both the state and federal levels. Sure, there have always been commissioners for certain agencies – the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Productivity Commission, the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission.

But I’m thinking here of these stand-alone commissioners with seemingly worthy missions who have no problem expressing essentially personal, albeit highly political, views even though they haven’t been elected. It’s also not clear what many of them do, let alone achieve. I guess they serve a purpose for a government keen to demonstrate that ‘something’ is being done about a concerning issue – appoint a commissioner.

Just recently, the federal Privacy Commissioner emerged on our screens telling us about meta-glasses, these new spectacles that can take photos and videos, play music and access AI, among other things. (Can they beam me up, Scotty, I’m wondering?)

She was speaking from the Gold Coast; my ABC coverage told me. And she was banging on about what these glasses mean and don’t mean for privacy. I was none the wiser about the legal implications, which seem to be a key issue.

But this really is a great gig: get paid a truckload of money by the taxpayer to do very little and jump onto the television from time to time. How do we benefit from having a Privacy Commissioner?

The bumf on the commission’s website tells me that, ‘We’re the independent national regulator for privacy and freedom of information. We promote and uphold your rights to access government-held information and have your personal information protected.’ But what does she do?

But fear not, there is also the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner. Again, her very existence is meant to convey to voters that the government takes these issues seriously. (Yep, just in case you are wondering, most of these stand-alone commissioners are women.)

The commissioner has just handed out wads of money to have a survey conducted on domestic, family and sexual violence. Like surveys on the use of illicit tobacco, I’m not sure there is much veracity to these types of surveys, but, hey, the commissioner can tick this one off her KPI list.

She is concerned. In her words, ‘I am deeply worried about the trajectories that we’re on, particularly with sexual violence. So, we absolutely have to face up to what isn’t working and identify what is working.’ Yep, that’s sorted.

Talking about illicit tobacco, I should mention that there is an Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner. Again, I’ve no idea what she does but here are the words: ‘The… Commissioner is a new role established by the Australian Government to coordinate efforts to combat the threat of illicit tobacco and e‑cigarettes to the community.’

Gosh, that coordination must be demanding, although there is absolutely no evidence that she has achieved anything other than, arguably, a growing market share for illicit tobacco products. But it’s OK because ‘the ITEC Commissioner will review and report on how well current actions are working. This will help provide the government evidence‑based advice covering policy, legal changes, new trends and future plans to combat illegal activity’.

The way I see things is that there is this growing phalanx of unelected, well-paid commissioners who are given jobs and then pontificate on essentially political issues while doing nothing practical or offering up any real solutions. In fact, the last thing they want to happen is for their specific problem to go away because they would then be out of a job.

And just to demonstrate that these commissioners are essentially untouchable, one of Victoria’s Multicultural Commissioners made a series of deeply antisemitic and offensive social media posts after 7 October, but nothing happened. This was notwithstanding many genuine complaints on the matter. Evidently, it’s fine to take the money attached to being a multicultural commissioner and give offence at the same time.

Needless to say, these commissioners and the associated costs add up to big sums for the long-suffering taxpayers. When Helen Silver undertook an audit of Victoria’s public sector, she identified over 1,000 agencies outside the major government departments. There was overlap, a lack of accountability and, in most cases, a complete absence of any evidence of their beneficial impact.

Silver recommended that many of these agencies simply be terminated and any residual functions that still needed to be undertaken be transferred to the relevant department. Unsurprisingly, the hapless Victorian premier at the time, Jacinta Allan, didn’t take up the advice.