Put here by Margaret Simons more succinctly than I probably can from my phone at the moment:

Over the last couple of years, the words “tightly held” have come up in almost every conversation about Andrews government decisions.

It reflects the way in which major policy has been developed by a small group of his most trusted people – developed in what one observer described as a “black box”, with even government ministers excluded, unless they were in the increasingly tiny circle of the favoured.

The politicisation of the public service – its lack of ability and sometimes the will to stand up to the premier – was becoming one of the themes of the government.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/26/daniel-andrews-remoulded-the-state-of-victoria-but-the-wheels-were-beginning-to-wobble

The problem was decisions occurring within the Premier's office despite departmental or ministerial advice, and often in advance of questions being asked. It's been a problem for years at this point but my experience of the issue really came to a head during COVID when trying to work with a DHHS / DFFH that was actually incapable of making any decision or holding to the ones that it did make and communicate with pretty deleterious outcomes.

The problem was particularly highlighted by the step change in those interactions in March 2021 when Merlino became acting Premier.

It was a functional issue, it's become a major factional issue within Labor, and it's a large element in the contempt for integrity institutions and ombudsmen that the government has shown recently.