The QVMAG has been identified as a priority project in the Northern Tasmania Development Corporation's (NTDC) Regional Priority Projects report.
READ MORE: Funding still needed for numerous projects for Northern Tasmania. The funding request from NTDC is $70 million.
This project would see the construction of a contemporary addition to the Royal Park Art Gallery featuring a large multifunctional exhibition space, a café and retail space, and parking.
Chief officer of Launceston Chamber of Commerce Will Cassidy said the museum and art gallery is entwined with what makes Launceston great.
"We're a city that's steeped in heritage and history and culture. We have a thriving local art scene. And we have residents that are passionate," he said. "We really need a museum and art gallery that's going to cater for the community."
Mr Cassidy said the development would also be beneficial for short-stay exhibitions, showcasing more art and attracting more visitors.
"We need a museum and art gallery that's going to drag people in because they want to see what's on display," he said.
Currently, the City of Launceston Council is looking into the future of the museum.
"In respect of the future direction of the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, I can advise that the council has developed a draft QVMAG Futures Plan, which is currently undergoing final review," said City of Launceston chief executive officer Michael Stretton
"We expect the plan will come back to the council in the near future and we will have more to say after that."
Community bodies look at $70m QVMAG redevelopment
The report wants to combine the redevelopment with contemporary marketing to develop new, modern programs and exhibition offerings, encouraging repeat visitation by locals and visitors.
Building fit-for-purpose facilities that encourage return visitation and a heightened sense of ownership by the Launceston community will support QVMAG, a national and international
Alison Foletta May 14 2022 - 3:30am … alison.foletta@austcommunitymedia.com.au
END
OPINION – THERE IS ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
'Tasmanian-cum-national cultural assets’ held in the QVMAG Collections are at serious risk given that ‘management’ insists upon the fundamentally inappropriate blanding and blending of the functions of governance and management in regard to this iconic institution.
That is so in that ‘management’ insists that Councillors have no role as ‘TRUSTEES’ by extension having effectively ‘no governance role’ and thus, by extension, there has been the creation of a self-serving BUREAUCRATICfiefdom – for context click here.
By way of comparison, as I have proposed for about two decades now, like the ‘governance’ of the TMAG – a State Government owned institution not a Hobart Council owned entity – ‘governance’ is devolved, via the ‘appointment’ of a Board of Trustees for the QVMAG, and populated with expert and trustworthy trustees:
• Nominated by ‘Governor and Council’ – in the TMAG’s case and Council in the QVMAG’s case;
• Appointed by the Minister for the Arts – say the Mayor and Minister in the QVMAG’s case given the current funding arrangement;
• With their tenure being at the ‘pleasure’ of ‘Governor and Council’ – effectively the Minister in the TMAG’s case with a whole-of-government overview and the Mayor with whole-of-Council in the QVMAG’s case;
• Which in turn delivers ‘trustworthy governance’ with ‘trustees’ being ‘expert and appropriately credentialed’ to deliver policies and strategies that are timely and fit-for-purpose … ‘best practice’.
At the TMAG, when there is a failure of ‘governance’ the Minister can, and relatively recently has indeed disciplined the ‘trustees’ for their breach of ‘trust’ on the recommendation of the Auditor General.
Thus, the ‘trust’ invested in the Trusteeships – the TMAG’S institutional governance being a case in point – is trustworthy and effective in its ‘arm’s length’ status.
Thus, in turn ‘governance’ is transparent and accountable and likewise, by extension, management is effective given its accountability to expert and trustworthy ‘Trustees’ – and by extension to the Minister and government.
This is a model to be found in most large public institutions like the QVMAG and TMAG worldwide.
No such ‘trust’ can be invested in a Council that has clearly ‘abdicated the obligations’ falling to City of Launceston Councillors via the inappropriate blanding and blending of governance and management ‘functions’ relative to the QVMAG – no matter how the Tasmanian Local Government Act 1993 is read and interpreted.
Moreover, this is much more than troubling – it is a fundamentally flawed circumstance generally not tolerated in effective public administration.
As good as, as effective as, ‘management’ might be, without accountability to an expert and trustworthy governing body, their ‘work, credibility and effectiveness’ is diminished. So too are the donations of money and cultural-cum-intellectual property etc. invested in a rudderless, ambiguously purposed, operation – albeit a musingplace.
At the QVMAG, the inherent lack of checks and balances – fiscal and other – is more than troubling. So, what is in fact at risk here?
Firstly, the appropriate care of 130-plus years of community investment in the QVMAG’s priceless cultural assets and by extension researchers’ free and unfettered access to scientific data/information, cultural material and social documentation.
I submit that the level of ineptitude in ‘governance’ is palpable and that a truly ‘independent and expert investigation’ relative to the QVMAG’s governance and management needs to be initiated – and sooner rather than later.
Alternatively the QVMAG’s institutional governance:
• Might well be devolved to the TMAG’s Trustees; with
• The City of Launceston devolving collection ‘ownership’ to the Tasmanian Government – and only because in law the asset must be 'owned' by some entity or other;
• The City of Launceston providing infrastructure access for the QVMAG’s operation in Launceston – and only because it is currently a ‘Council asset’ and that there is no imperative to change that;
• The City of Launceston providing competitive funding for 'program/project funding' on an annual or triannual basis – to ensure that Launcestonians have access to purposeful cultural programming relative to local aspirations and, furthermore, that other Councils might reasonably be expected to join with Launceston in this;
• When and where appropriate, the City of Launceston, and other Councils along with it, providing marketing support – again to ensure that Launcestonians and northern Tasmanians have access to purposeful cultural programming relative to local aspirations.
Given that the TMAG funding and governance model has been proven to be beyond politics for the most part, the cultural assets held in the ‘TMAG’s trust’ turns out to be as safe as can be reasonably be expected and thus are ‘purposefully managed’ within a practice ‘fit for purpose’.
The fear of losing a cultural asset is arguably unfounded so long as there is an appropriate ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ backgrounding the paradigm shift being advocated here.
As is often the case, local governments like the City of Launceston’s Council’s 'wishlists' at election time turn out to be totally out of kilter with community ‘needs’ in regard to social housing, health and disability servicing, sustainable environmental management and more still. Indeed all in all, it is ever likely to unproductively fuel long-standing community tensions to do with ‘arts funding’ and other needs, other aspirations within politicised competitive calls upon the ‘public purse’.
Aside from anything else, IF wishes were to be delivered in full, then the City of Launceston’s ‘infrastructure maintenance commitment’ would grow to who knows what level as would the recurrent operational costs that are never factored in by far too many ‘Council bureaucrats’ and the likes of the Chamber of Commerce with their “someone else will pay mindset” as they, in time, retire from the scene, to rock away in their rocking chairs far away from fray and the cut and thrust of real world issues.
Yes, cultural institutions like the QVMAG have a part to play in all this, and if they did not they would be absolutely irrelevant. Here there are roles to be played as there are for sporting facilities etc. etc. It is just the case that the ‘fly in money from elsewhere’ mindset waiting for yet another ‘parachute drop’ to selectively fill the open purses of who knows who, is highly questionable. And by extension it bears all the hallmarks of disconnected governance – Federal, State and Local.
Given that too much is at risk, it is time to get off the expensive funding from elsewhere merry-go-round– it is time to get real!
Ray Norman 2022
No comments:
Post a Comment