FW: Draft Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery Legislation

FOR THE RECORD

 

From: Ray Norman 7250 <raynorman7250@bigpond.com>
Date: Monday, 14 November 2016 1:10 pm
To: Will Hodgman <reception@tas.liberal.org.au>
Cc: "Vanessa Goodwin [Minister for the Arts]" <vanessa.goodwin@parliament.tas.gov.au>, "Peter Gutwein {Treasurer & Minister Local Govt.}" <peter.gutwein@parliament.tas.gov.au>
Subject: Draft Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery Legislation

 

Dear Premier,
 
RE: Draft Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery Legislation

Firstly it is with considerable pleasure that I write to you in regard to the draft legislation for the Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery (TMAG). Electorally, once the Act is in place your government can justifiably expect to significantly raise standards in regard to this aspect of governance in Tasmania – indeed Australia. This is something your constituents will appreciate and reward you for.
 
Tasmania already stands out in that such a significant and diverse component of the nation's 'cultural estate' is held in Tasmania within the TMAG's collections plus other public collections throughout Tasmania. Importantly, this draft Act underscores the importance of the Tasmanian component of the nation's collections that altogether add growing value to the 'Australian cultural reality'.
 
I was provided a copy of the draft Act circulated to Royal Society members one of whom was asking my opinion of it. He knew that I had working knowledge of the Act this Act replaces as I once held the position of Senior Project Office (Visual Arts & Crafts) with the Tasmanian Arts Advisory Board – albeit quite some time ago now.
 
I can only say that I was considerably impressed and very much reassured by the draft Act's provisions. This is especially so given the level of accountability and the rigor of the security the Act offers to Tasmania's cultural community – indeed people beyond the state.  Importantly, the draft Act provides a new and enhanced level of protection for all those people who:

• Have important research outcomes and intellectual property invested in institution – and for a long time;
• Have cultural and intellectual property invested in the institutions collections – history collections, scientific collections and the various collections of cultural production, etc.;
• Use the institution as an educational resource in a myriad of ever expanding ways;
• Have donated money, and equally importantly, significant cultural and scientific material to the institution's collections since the TMAG's foundation; and all those who have
• Sponsored the institution and volunteered their time towards 'investing in' and thus enriching the institution's programs over time.

Far from being a 'theme park' focusing upon the amusement and entertainment of visitors the TMAG plays a substantial and multi-dimensional role in Tasmania's community life. Likewise, museums and art galleries throughout Tasmania are playing an increasingly important part in the state's cultural tourism. Arguably, with a 21st Century refocusing, Tasmania's museums and art galleries have more than ever to offer the wider community with much yet to be realised.

Arguably more so now than ever the states' museums and art galleries can offer new opportunities and especially so if they were to be operating collaboratively and cooperatively. It also needs to be acknowledged that all this is now taking place in a changing world with new demands.
 
That said, and against this background, I have serious concerns about how the increasing importance of museums and art galleries throughout Tasmania and beyond the TMAG. My concerns are to do with the ways 'public collections' can be both capitalised upon and protected. In particular, I have in mind the 'credible accountability' of those institutions operating under the aegis of the Local Govt. Act 1993.
 
These institutions and their collections might well offer so much more than currently if they were required to manage their collections with the same levels of security and accountability that is embedded in the draft TMAG Act 2016. Currently under the aegis of the Local Govt. Act they do not!

SECTIONS 65 & 62 of the Local Govt. Act 1993 calls upon a general manager to guarantee that the councillors/aldermen are making their policy determinations on expert advice. Based on performance, all too often this cannot be demonstrated relative to collection management. This is so in so much as there is sufficient ambiguity in the Act to allow for the 'deeming' of expertise without it needing to be demonstrated nor by necessity to have objective veracity.
 
More to the point, given that it's the councillors'/aldermen's role to determine policy as 'Trustees' and it is management's role to implement these policies the ambiguity entrenched within SECTIONS 65 & 62 is concerning. It is particularly so in regard to Tasmania's museum and art galleries' governance and management – and especially so in regard collection management in a 21st Century context and under the Local Govt Act.
 
The inappropriateness of SECTIONS 65 & 62 is only compounded by the fact that 'museum management' is not regarded as a council's "core business" – indeed nor should it be. Therefore, the governance and management roles can become, arguably has become, blurred. Clearly, this comes about due to the lack of relevant legislation plus the almost unavoidable lack of museum governance expertise nor contemporaneous museum policymaking, within a cultural context and/or within the representative wing of councils – these collections quasi 'Trustees'.
 
Unfortunately, those 'public collections' held by organisations not incorporated as not-for-profit organisations, hold within them important collections containing highly valuable material that, collectively, is quite vulnerable to inappropriate dispersals and disposal. Moreover, there are the added risks that dubious accountability brings given that this 'property' is regarded as being the property of 'the council' – not the people's or the Crown's.

The apparent albeit somewhat unforeseen risk is to do with the potential for the inappropriate dispersal or disposal of important cultural and scientific material. Why is this risk there? At its simplest, if there is a need to find 'cash' to meet some perception of a fiscal requirement, or some other imperative, then using the investment in 'cultural material' to fulfill such an aspiration may well come into play – and with legal effect under the Local Govt Act.  

Typically public museums and art galleries have rigorous collection policies designed to mitigate against this kind of outcome. However, this is not the case for museums and art galleries operating under the aegis of Tasmania's Local Govt. Act 1993.
 
I submit that now is the appropriate time to address the issue of the security of Tasmania's public collections and to ensure that 21st Century standards of accountability apply.

In addition, there is a need to ensure that cultural sensibilities and sensitivities are actually applied to all of the state's important museum and art gallery collections. This would especially be so in the context of what these collections have to offer Tasmania looking forward – especially so in concert with the TMAG collections.

These collections might well be better protected via an independent public inquiry commissioned to survey and interrogate the 'public collections paradigm' in Tasmania. Such an inquiry should involve appropriate evidence focused experts, the Auditor General, community representatives et al. It is of some importance that the NSW Govt. has initiated an inquiry, an Upper House Inquiry in fact, charged to inquire into NSW museums and art galleries' governance and funding. That  inquiry's report falls due Nov 14 2016 – see https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2403#tab-timeline & ttp://nswmuseumsinquiry.blogspot.com.au/

I look forward to your response but most of all I look forward to the growth in importance of Tasmania's museums and art galleries and the collections they hold.

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

"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.