MEDIA RELEASE
The questions attached to this release have been submitted today to the City of Launceston's Mayor and Councillors.
It is not well understood that Launceston's Councillors are in fact the Queen Victoria Museum & Art Gallery's (QVMAG) 'default Trustees' given that they are the institution's 'governing body'.
Ray Norman, cultural geographer and member of the Launceston Concerned Citizens Network (LCCN), has collated the questions. He has been researching 'musingplace governance' for many years and the QVMAG has been a key reference in that research given that, as he says, "it is my musingplace at the bottom of the hill upon which I live".
Ray Norman has said that,"the QVMAG is one of Tasmania's, indeed the Tamar region's, most important cultural assets and it is unusual to say the least that it does not have a stand-alone board of governance as is generally required in the corporate sector and like institutions elsewhere."
The questions submitted have been gleaned from within the LCCN network and a wider Community of Ownership & Interest (COI) – See Reference #4. They reflect concerns that have remained unaddressed for many years.
When flagging that it was anticipated that questionS would be sent to council, council administration provided a somewhat alarming response in that they may not be accepted or acceptable! See https://lcc63.blogspot.com/2020/01/under-local-government-act-1993-meeting.html
It is acknowledged that there are quite a few questions but the concerns embedded in them have been building up over rather a long period of time.
Ray Norman has said today that "the status quo is unsustainable but apart from that there is way too much at stake, rather at too much at risk, to keep on looking the other way".
"Indeed, it needs to be understood that the QVMAG's collections are a component of the 'national estate' with an estimated 'value' of something in the order a quarter of a billion dollars – all derived from donations for over 125 years. Moreover, ratepayers and taxpayers have provided millions upon million of dollars for recurrent expenditures for decades," Ray Norman said.
The Launceston Concerned Citizens Network looks forward to Council addressing, seriously addressing, the issues embedded in the questions and looks toward a purposeful outcome.
..........................
END
For more information please contact
- Ray Norman 03-6334 2176
- Ray Norman raynorman7250@bigpond.com
PH/ 03-6334 68 68
QUESTIONS ADDRESSED TO MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS
The questions
here have been framed, amongst other thigs, against the background of the
GM/CEO’s ‘ press statements’ back in August 2019 and in The
Examiner –26/1212/2019 https://www.examiner.com.au/story/6544967/city-of-launceston-councils-2019-in-review/
–
and where the
GM/CEO said in August:
“A review of QVMAG would determine if it is best to
transition away from operational models to a more "contemporary" management model.
"This could involve governance being provided by a board
and leadership is provided by a general manager who can focus more exclusively
on the business of the museum and art gallery," the OAP said. A
similar review would be undertaken for the Inveresk Precinct as a whole.
A range of structural changes to QVMAG's interim operation
to enable the organisation to use its resources more effectively.
"These changes are consistent with
a new leadership model which provides the opportunity for the general manager to be strategically
focused, and creates clearer career development pathways
especially in the curatorial area," the OAP said.
QVMAG
is Australia's largest regional museum and gallery. It is visited by 140,000
people annually who spend about $32.8 million.
The collection is valued at more than
$235 million, putting QVMAG in the same league as the Tasmanian Museum and Art
Gallery worth $408 million, South Australia Museum worth
nearly $300 million and the Northern Territory Museum and Art Gallery worth
$120 million.
The OAP estimates the current director
is only able to spend about three days per week on QVMAG business.
"This is very little time when
compared with other directors of art galleries," the OAP said.
"The OAP notes that people work at
QVMAG because they are passionate about what they do. However, they need
support and direction to be successful.
"Old ways need to give way to contemporary practice and
for museums and art galleries to be successful, they need to be run as an
effective business."
At the outset, it needs to be said that
this press statement seems to point to a number of misunderstandings of ‘the
facts’ or surreptitiously management is overreaching and exceeding its
authority. I therefore address the questions below to ‘the councillors’
in their capacity as ‘QVMAG Trustees’ albeit that this may be by
default.
The questions are as follows:
- [A] Is
it acknowledged and recognised that there is a perception that the City of
Launceston’s ‘Councillors’ are the QVMAG’s
Trustees/Councillors/Governors by default, and as a consequence, all
materials – objects, works of art, specimen’s, cultural &
intellectual property, historic material etc. – held in the QVMAG’s
collections are under the Councillor’s/Trustee’s custody in both ‘law’
and ‘lore’ and that you are not delivering on the
trust invested in you?
- [A] Consequent
to this, is it acknowledged that the determination of QVMAG policies is an
‘obligation’ that falls to Trustees/Councillors/Governors? [B] Do you acknowledge that QVMAG policies are
outdated, outmoded and fail to meet current ‘best practice’
standards?
- [A] Consequent
to these considerations, is it acknowledged that the determination of
QVMAG ‘strategic directions’ is a matter that falls exclusively
to Trustees/Councillors/Governors? [B]That
this is so albeit that ‘management’ may provide logistic
support and ‘expert advice’ under SECTION 65 of the
Local Govt. ACT, nevertheless, do you acknowledge any ‘lack of
adequacy’ you are receiving, and have received, in regard to
advice relevant to the QVMAG’s strategic directions and policies?
- [A] Is
it acknowledged that the determination of QVMAG ‘policies strategic
directions’ are matters that the GM/CEO, beyond providing/facilitating
‘expert advice’ under SECTION 65 of the Act, has no
role to play?
- [A] Is
it acknowledged that the determination of QVMAG ‘policies strategic
directions’ are matters that the GM/CEO, beyond
garnering/providing/facilitating ‘expert advice’ under SECTION
65 of the Act, has no direct personal expertise relevant to cultural
and/or scientific institution and thus personally has no role to
play in policy determination?
- [A] Do
you, as QVMAG Trustees, acknowledge that as an ‘art gallery and
museum’ the QVMAG is a complex multi-dimensional operation and
thus the ‘expert advice’ provided under SECTION 65 of
the Act, has been proven to be less than ‘expert’ and over a
rather long period of time? [B] Moreover,
as ratepayers and taxpayers, Launcestonians/Tasmanians do you acknowledge
that they are not receiving the cultural, social and economic
dividends/rewards commensurate with their long-term investment?
- [A] Do
you, as QVMAG Trustees, acknowledge that the QVMAG has received
substantial gifts, donations and sponsorships over a very long period of
time, from Launcestonians and others, all of whom have made their
contributions on trust? [B] Moreover,
as ’Trustees’ do you acknowledge that you are not meeting your obligations to
all those to whom you owe an obligation, given what they have invested in
the institution? That is donors, sponsors, scholars, researchers,
owners of cultural and intellectual property – the QVMAG’S
Community of Ownership & Interest (COI) see http://thequeensmusingplace.blogspot.com/p/definition.html
and REFERENCE 4.
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that council’s GM/CEO compares the QVMAG with – the
TMAG, SAM, NTMAG, et al – that are all purposeful institutions that
have standalone ‘governance bodies’ populated by appointed
experts relevant to the institution’s ‘purpose and strategic
direction’? [B] Do you acknowledge that as elected representatives
in local governance you may lack the appropriate ‘expertise’
and are likewise ill equipped to fulfil your ‘Trusteeship role’
for an institution such as the QVMAG? [C] Do you acknowledge that senior management in
local governance is not inherently qualified to provide a ‘governance
function’ for an institution such as the QVMAG, or indeed a
governance function of any kind, given that it would be fundamentally in
conflict with their ‘management function’? [D] Furthermore, do you acknowledge that a GM/CEO
cannot be held accountable for their actions, her/his misdemeanours or
those of her/his underlings given their capacity to use – misuse(?)
– the self-preserving ‘emergency powers’ afforded them under
SECTION 62 of the Act and also that you collectively and serially
have failed, and serially, to hold management accountable?
- [A] Will
you, in the cause of transparency, inform the QVMAG’s (COI) what
formal representations you have made to the State Govt. and/or any other
funding agency, public or private, towards improving the QVMAG’s
performance outcomes and/or its ‘cultural tourism’
relevance? [B] Likewise, will/can
you provide a timeframe within which these representations took place in
the calendar year 2019 – or earlier?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that council conscripts recurrent funding for the QVMAG
via an undisclosed levy/charge within each and every one of the city’s
rate demands? [B] Will you, provide
an estimate of the average percentage of a rate demand that this ‘levy/charge’
represents?
- [A] Will
you, in the cause of transparency, disclose what percentage of the QVMAG’s
recurrent operational budget that is derived from ‘earned income’?
[B] Will you disclose the number of, and the and
size of, project grants the QVMAG sought and/or won in the past two
calendar years?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that the ‘advice mechanism’ put in place by
Council some time ago has been rendered dysfunctional by council’s
management in that for a range of reasons the ‘QVMAG Advisory
Committee’ has not met sufficiently and consequently has not
reported appropriate policy development despite the GM saying
January 2 2019 that ‘’[the QVMAG] strategy [is] the biggest and most
influential things [council] is working on at the moment” and
council’s being promised that “a report [on a cultural policy being]
due by the end of May 2018”? … [REF-1]… https://www.examiner.com.au/story/5831340/the-year-ahead-for-city-of-launceston-council-to-be-big/
… [REF-2]… https://www.examiner.com.au/story/5267843/city-of-launcestons-cultural-policy-confusion/
[B] Moreover, do you acknowledge that the QVMAG’s
COI – ratepayers, taxpayers, donors, scholars et al – have been
poorly serviced, and less than adequately rewarded, despite rate and tax
payers ‘conscripted investment’ in the institution over time?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that as the QVMAG’s ‘default trustees’
by-and-large you have been disengaged for all practical purposes and that
you have functionally abdicated, and thus have put aside your obligations
as trustees and exposed the institution to risk at many levels?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that as the QVMAG’s ‘default trustees’ you
have failed to appropriately protect the cultural, social and economic
assets invested in the QVMAG as an institution, its collections and the ‘property’
– cultural, intellectual, economic – held in trust, invested in,
the institution on trust?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that as the QVMAG’s ‘default trustees’ you
have made no discernible attempt to address the clear and obvious QVMAG ‘policy
shortfalls’ in 2019, and indeed over many years? [B] Moreover, do you acknowledge that,
collectively and individually, you have sanctioned management usurping
your governance role in regard to ‘policy and strategic directions’
relative to the QVMAG? [C] And
furthermore, do you acknowledge that as a consequence of your serial
disengagement as ‘trustees’ you have deliberately, or
inadvertently, underwritten the institution’s ‘purposelessness’?
[D] And similarly, do you acknowledge the
possibility that you are exposing, and have exposed, the institution and
its collections to serious but avoidable risks?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that for the life of this council, you as the QVMAG’s ‘default
trustees’ have failed to ensure that the QVMAG as an institution
has a ‘purposeful strategic direction’ in place that
articulates ‘performance indicators’ relevant to community
investments in the institution? [B] Moreover,
as trustees, do you understand that there is trust that is invested in you
that you and that have failed to acknowledge that and deliver upon it?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that you are seen as being oblivious to QVMAG asset
disposals and careless of where any income coming from it might be
directed? [B] Likewise, do you acknowledge that such ‘asset
disposals’ might happen without your knowledge and approval? [C] Indeed, do you acknowledge that this is a
dereliction of trust that falls to you?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that you have commissioned serval consultants and that you
have not shared their ‘expert
advice’ with either your constituency or the institution’s COI
– ratepayers, taxpayers, donors, scholars et al?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that GM/CEO Stretton’s ‘Strategic Realignment Pan’
has by-and-large been devised and implemented in isolation from the
community and youselves as the city’s ‘governors’? [B] Likewise, do you acknowledge that ‘the
plan’, as reported in the press, flags changes to the QVMAG’s “governance”
and that too appears to have been developed in isolation from the
community and yourselves as the QVMAG’s Trustees/Governors? [C] Moreover, do you acknowledge that ratepayers,
taxpayers, donors and others with ‘investments’ in the
institution – social, cultural & economic – have largely been
excluded from whatever planning processes that have been employed, and
that have led to, a ‘strategic position’ being arrived at
notwithstanding the fact that ‘policy and strategic positioning’
is wholly the business of governance–yourselves
– and is not within management’s purpose or raison d’etre?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that at the close of business 2019 the City of Launceston
did not have, and concerningly could not provide, a ‘Register of
Delegated Authorities’ as required by the Local Govt. Act? [B] Likewise, do you acknowledge that this is not
a matter of bureaucratic discretion? [C] Given
the facts, what actions are you proposing and in what timeframe?
- [A] Do
you acknowledge that as ‘Trustees’ you have aimed at
positioning yourselves, collectively and individually, beyond criticism
and critique and thus by-and-large you have positioned yourselves beyond
accountability?
Quite
some time ago, Margaret Mead, American cultural anthropologist, said, “Never
doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the
world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Here, now, via Local Governance, and in
Launceston, change is required and I trust that in answering the questions
above that might be realised and that a start can be achieved.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
REFERENCE 1: Consultancy data
The council is implementing changes to
its reporting systems to make information about its use of external consultants
available. The change came after repeated requests for The Examiner for
the data. Data on external consultants engaged by the council had not been
previously recorded, Mr Stretton said. In 2019, the council has used external
consultants to look into free parking, shopping in the city, organisational
restructure, building heights, and has requested an external consultant be used
for a review into Cityprom DEC 26 2019 https://www.examiner.com.au/story/6544967/city-of-launceston-councils-2019-in-review/
REFERENCE 2: Cultural strategy
One of the most exciting things the
City of Launceston council plan to do this year is develop its cultural strategy. The council’s general
manager Michael Stretton the strategy is one of the biggest and most
influential things it is working on at the moment.The strategy looks
at the way the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Galley can evolve and how it could
be the centre of the North’s creative culture and arts scene. …… “There
is a real opportunity for us to grow arts and culture as an economic driver for
the Northern region and that’s why we see the cultural strategy as being so
important,” Mr Stretton said. One of the most exciting things the City of
Launceston council plan to do this year is develop its cultural strategy. JAN 2 2019 https://www.examiner.com.au/story/5831340/the-year-ahead-for-city-of-launceston-council-to-be-big/
REFERENCE 3: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2018/19 CoL
ANNUAL PLAN … I am delighted to present the
City of Launceston’s Annual Plan for 2018/19. This plan sets the strategic
direction for the Council over the coming 12 months in accordance with the
overall community vision as laid out in the Greater Launceston Plan…….The past
year has seen incredible development for the City of Launceston. There is a
real sense of confidence across the city. It is the responsibility of this
Council to harness that confidence and enthusiasm so that the wider community
will benefit from the economic growth we are now witnessing……. And while the
past year has been an exciting one for the City, 2018/19 will see even more
growth as a number of important projects come on line, such as Brisbane Street
Mall redevelopment, Riverbend Park, and the new University of Tasmania northern
campus, as well as a number of private developments……. The future looks
brighter than ever with an estimated $800 million worth of projects on the City
of Launceston’s books over the coming decade. With that in mind, it is
paramount that the Council has a clear and defined strategic direction to
ensure we not only balance the region’s assets and look to leverage exciting
new opportunities for residents and businesses alike……. Operationally, the key
deliverables for the City of Launceston over the next 12 months will be a new
Long-Term Financial Plan, a Strategic Asset …… Management Plan, as well as a
four-year pathway for the incoming Council, which will be decided by the
Launceston electorate at the October Local Government Elections……. The Annual
Plan is projected to achieve a small underlying surplus of $186,000, which is
an excellent result given the loss of $1.3 million in revenue from TasWater
distributions together with other operational cost impacts for the year. Always
front of mind for the Council is the need to keep rate increases to the minimum
level possible, and at the same time deliver on the services expected by our
community. Unfortunately cost escalation is an ongoing reality that all
businesses have to manage and this Annual Plan has been prepared on the basis
of an increase in the general rate of 2.8% plus a $4 per household cost for
landfill tokens……. This document is extremely important as a key strategic
focal point for the organisation’s departments and is used as an integral part
of the Council’s corporate reporting system both to the Aldermen and the
community. …… I would like to thank the Council staff for their dedication and
commitment to delivering this Annual Plan on behalf of the community. I commend
the 2018/19 Annual Plan to you all. …. Michael Stretton General Manager
REFERENCE 4: Community of Ownership &
Interest
DEFINITION:
- Community
of Ownership and Interest: (compound noun/proposition) an
all-inclusive collective/community of people, individuals and groups, who
in any way have multi layered relationships with a place or cultural
landscape and/or the operation of an institution, organisation or
establishment – typically a network.
- Usage
and context: cultural geography; civic and environmental planning;
and community administration
- REFERENCE: Dr
Bill Boyd, SCU et al
[Links] 1 … http://thequeensmusingplace.blogspot.com/p/definition.html
… 2 … http://qv7250ownership.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment