As you may already be aware I have made a request to receive a copy of the recent Cultural Strategy Discussion Paper along with a copy of the brief it responds to – See response from Richard Mulvaney below. Given Richard’s response and the imminent departure of the General Manager, am I to take this response as an indication to a return to Launceston Council’s disinclination to share strategic and otherwise innocuous information with its constituents?
As you might expect, I see considerable shortfalls and failures in what appears to be the ‘strategy’ in play in regard to this report. That any of this might be imagined in any way as ‘confidential’ or ‘commercial-in-confidence’ approaches the outrageous! It is ridiculous to say the very least. Imagining that the ‘expertise’ (the cultural expertise) exists somewhere other than within the communities that gives it expression is arrogant to a point almost beyond belief even if an outside point of view might well be useful and insightful.
Nonetheless, the report’s proponents it seems are exiting the scene in a pall of smoke with mirrors flashing and in this case leaving a vacuum their wake. Moreover, as ‘QVMAG trustees’ it seems that neither yourself nor your fellow Alderpeople find yourselves able to trust your constituency at any level with anything resembling their own assessment of Launceston’s cultural realities, their histories, their narratives.
Unsurprisingly, the issue of accountability springs to mind and immediately given that the QVMAG is an aspect of, and is integral to, Launceston’s cultural life and realties. Despite everything, as QVMAG trustees you are not separate to the city’s cultural life. Likewise, you as Aldermen/Trustees are not in control of the city’s cultural expression(s) in any way – or with any authority. Rather it falls to you to facilitate the kind of cultural expression in the city that gives it its ‘placedness’.
Compounding the problematics here is the fact that the consultant's brief seems also to be a secret document with reporting etc. apparently taking place in camera. This just compounds the perversity of the process’s opacity. What is there to hide? Why hide it? Indeed, are you and the Aldermen/Trustee in fact fully aware of the report’s purpose, objectives and the strategies employed to fulfill its purpose and objectives? Have you played any meaningful part in briefing the consultant? If so how and when?
Compounding the apparent opacity even more is the ‘report’ that you – as Mayor! – intend to “get rid of” the Museums Governance Advisory Board (MGAB) ASAP thus eliminating, it would appear, whatever formal or informal independent ‘advice’ that Council/Trustees might have available to it relevant to QVMAG policy making. Given that YPIPA (York Park Inveresk Precinct Authority) has been eliminated recently the report of your MGAB aspiration appears to have significant credibility taken together with YPIPA’s elimination.
On top of all this there is the extraordinary length of time this whole business has been dragged out over – not to mention all the obfuscation. Given that Council determined in August 2015 that the QVMAG would have a stand alone ‘governing body’ and that this has not yet happened, nor has any progress been made towards that being achieved, this alone raises several issues relative to accountability. Apparently this comes about under the conditions of, and aegis of, SECTION 62 of the Local Govt. Act. Sadly, Council’s disconnect with the city’s ‘cultural communities’, and its apparent disinclination to be accountable at any level, is all too evident.
The outcome of Launceston Council’s serial disinclination to be truly accountable to its constituency has delivered to ratepayers the most expensive rates in Tasmania with rates being in the order of 20% higher than those of adjoining jurisdictions. Put another another way, Launceston's rates are typically around $500 more expensive than adjoining jurisdictions. This could only happen as an outcome, the trickle-down-outcome, of ratepayers and constituents essentially being held in disregard (contempt even?!) and over a long period.
I am imagining that the QVMAG’s Community of Ownership & Interest (COI) should be somehow involved in determining the basis for ‘a cultural strategy and a reimagined QVMAG’ given that apparently the institution’s ‘future governance’ is apparently contingent upon the report and/or its advice. Taking into account that about 30 thousand ratepayers – a fraction of the QVMAG’s total COI – are conscripted funders of (investors in!) the QVMAG as an institution via their rates, “good governance” would suggest that they should be proactively involved in this strategic process. If they feel they are being held in contempt that’d be entirely understandable – reasonable even ... and some do. Unfortunately the narratives to be found in all this reflects very poorly upon Launceston as a place, the city’s commitment to inclusiveness and the flow-on impacts upon the quality of its cultural life in the region. It need not be so!
I ask that you and all aldermen to seriously consider reviewing the current approach to this matter towards there being meaningful inclusion of the the constituency – the city’s and the QVMAG’s COI – in the development of the ’Cultural Strategy’ to ensure that it be inclusive and transparent – there might well be overflow to other strategic decision making for the city.
I look forward to receiving your response and any advice that you might be able to offer in regard to this matter in the near future.
Regards,
Ray Norman
Ray Norman
<zingHOUSEunlimited>
The lifestyle design enterprise and research network
PH: 03-6334 2176
EMAIL 1: raynorman7250@bigpond.com
40 Delamere Crescent Trevallyn TAS. 7250
WEBsite: http://www.raynorman7250.blogspot.com
CLICK HERE: http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au/lcc/index.php?c=69 c/index.php?c=69
LINK: http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/271170/Good_Governance_Guide_May_2016.pdf
“A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” Thomas Paine
“The standard you walk past is the standard you accept ” David Morrison
zHu Electronic Communications Policy.
This email is confidential, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone outside the intended recipients is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender. The views expressed in this email are not necessarily the views of zingHOUSEunlimited, unless clearly intended otherwise.
On 10/05/2017 12:29 pm, "Richard Mulvaney" <Richard.Mulvaney@launceston.tas.gov.au> wrote:
> Dear Ray
>
> Thank you for your enquiry about the Cultural Strategy.
>
> I have spoken with the General Manager. The recent presentation by Robyn
> Archer to the City of Launceston was a discussion paper. It was a preliminary
> report not the final document. We now need to do a feasibility assessment and
> financial scoping to determine the viability of the recommendations and the
> Council's position on them following the assessing, which will then flow into
> a final document. It will then be presented to Council and then the broader
> cultural community.
>
> Much work to do but very encouraging signs.
>
> Regards, Richard
>
>
> Richard Mulvaney I Director I Queen Victoria Museum & Art Gallery and Princess
> Theatre
> T 03 6323 3700 I F 03 6323 3776 I M 0409 744 392 I www.qvmag.tas.gov.au
>
>
>
>
> [http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/qvmag125.png]
>
> [http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/twitter.png]<https://twitte
> r.com/LtonCityCouncil>
> [http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/youtube.png]
> <http://www.youtube.com/user/LauncestonCtyCouncil>
> [http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/www.png]
> <http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au>
> [http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/LCC_YVYL.png]
> <http://yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au/>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this, or any other e-mail or
> document.
>
> ________________________________________
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
>
> Information in this transmission is intended only for the person(s) to whom it
> is addressed and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If
> you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying or dissemination
> of the information is unauthorised and you should delete/destroy all copies
> and notify the sender. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of
> the information contained in this transmission.
>
> This disclaimer has been automatically added.
------ End of Forwarded Message
![http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/qvmag125.png]](http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/qvmag125.png]){kind=link}
![http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/twitter.png]<https://](http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/twitter.png]<https://){kind=link}
![http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/youtube.png]](http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/youtube.png]){kind=link}
![http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/www.png]](http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/www.png]){kind=link}
![http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/LCC_YVYL.png]](http://api.launceston.tas.gov.au/eCard/disclaimer/LCC_YVYL.png]){kind=link}