LETTER TO LCC ALDERMEN: QVMAG Collection & Deaccesion Policy Determination

TO: Mayor & Aldermen

Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 13:30:01

To: Ald. Albert van Zetten, LCC Records 

Cc: Peter Gutwein [Minister for Local Government], Phillip Hoysted ,Vanessa Goodwin [Minister for the Arts]

Dear Albert,

I have written to the General Manager last Monday (copied below) asking a relatively simple and straight forward question and one that only he has the information required to answer it. I’ve not received a response or even an acknowledgement of the receipt of my email. The draft(?) collection policy provided to me by Richard Mulvaney some time ago is also attached here as I had attached it to my email to the GM. CLICK HERE TO SEE A COPY

The substance of the question goes to the appropriateness of the QVMAG, as a Publicly Funded Cultural keepingplace, operating in the 21st C without, in my opinion, a contemporaneously relevant collection policy. There are no other policy positions more important to a cultural institution such as the QVMAG than its Collection Policies and by extension its Deaccession Policy and its consequent management processes.

Furthermore, for whatever extraordinary reason, it appears that ‘management’ has determined that it is appropriate (convenient?) to embed the institution’s Deaccession  Policy within the Collection Policy. I suggest that once expertly scrutinised other concerns are likely to emerge relative to the kind of ‘policy’ somewhat reluctantly(?) provided to me at my request but seemingly unavailable to other interested parties – at least not easily or freely.

Over recent years I have been advocating the review and renewal of the QVMAG Collection and Deaccession Policies. As the QVMAG Trustees you are accountable to the institution’s constituency – ratepayers, taxpayers, donors, sponsors researchers, scholars, et al.–  and thus it is incumbent upon you to ensure that you are receiving appropriate advice upon which you can make your decisions – independent advice, expert advice, considered advice. 

This is especially so when it comes to ‘policy determination’ and the review of management outcomes relative to ‘Trustee determined advice’.

As Trustees and ‘stewards’ of a collection that is significant in the context of collections that collectively constitute the ‘national cultural estate’ I put it to you that:

1. The policies you put in place need to be relevant to contemporaneous cultural sensibilities and sensitivities;
2. Alert to policy making elsewhere that is consistent with ‘best practice’ at work in public cultural institutions;
3. The policies you put in place need to be in the public domain and provide the level security reasonably expected of the institution by its constituency;
4. Policy determinations undertaken by you need to happen in a timely way and mindful of ‘the trust’ that is invested in you as the Trustees of the QVMAG collections; and

especially so in regard to SECTION 65 of the Tasmania’s Local Govt. Act. Furthermore, all this is relevant to the ways Section 65 can be, or has been, applied to the stewardship of QVMAG collections and your policy determinations in respect to the QVMAG, one of Australia’s significant cultural institutions.

This is a matter that I’ve raised in various Council forums over time and that have by-and-large gone unanswered and I put it to you that is evidenced in the policy document attached. Also, in the light of aspirations articulated over time, and recently, in regard to the “rationalisation” of the QVMAG collections recent developments pose particular concerns in regard as to how that might be done generally, and in particular in accord with what ‘policies’, by what processes and in what timeframe.

I look forward to Council’s response, indeed your response as Trustees, to the situation I put before you with considerable interest and concern.

Regards,

Ray Norman

zingHOUSEunlimited

The lifestyle design enterprise and research network

 Trevallyn TAS. 7250

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Forwarded Message

From: Ray Norman

Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 17:19:20 

To: Robert Dobrzynski 

Subject: QVMAG Collection & Deaccesion Policy

Dear Robert,

I write to you as the manager concerned with facilitating the preparation of LCC Agenda papers. As you may be aware I have an interest in the QVMAG’s Collection Policy and the Deaccession Policy now embedded within it – See attachment proved to me by Richard Mulvaney 21.04.2015. I’m aware that this policy has been under development for a very long time. This year I enquired about its development in January and to my knowledge the policy has not yet been presented to the Aldermen/Trustees for their consideration.

For some context to my question:

• Ignoring previous correspondence with Richard Mulvaney and yourself I have been seeking information in regard to the QVMAG Collection and Deaccession Poilicy(ies) since February 2014;
• Early in March 2014 , as a  member of the MGAB,  I received information via Richard Mulvaney that there was an in-house QVMAG Collections Policy under development that included a Deaccesion component;
• Early in April 2014 , as a  member of the MGAB, I provided Richard Mulvaney with suggestions for a redraft of the QVMAG Collections Policy;
• In January this year, 2015, I requested  a progress report on the policy and it be presented to the Aldermen/Trustees; and
• In late April I received “the Collection Policy“ that I’m given to understand will at some time be presented to the Aldermen/Trustees for endorsement/approval/implementation with it being “approved by the [QVMAG?] Executive Management Committee 18/02/2015”.

Interestingly, against this background there does not appear to be any evidence that the MGAB has formally considered this/these policies and clearly the progress towards ‘Trustee approval” has been glacial for whatever reasons none of which, I put to you, can be attributed to the complexity of the policy as it stands.

The key question arising out of the above is to do with the appropriateness of the policy and by extension, what independent ‘expert advice’ will you be relying upon when this policy is indeed presented to the Aldermen/Trustees for their consideration. As you have reminded me on several occasion it is your role to ensure this “expert advice” and I am, along with the Aldermen/Trustees I presume, keen to know what the source of that advice may be.

I look forward to your early advice on this matter as I believe that it something of considerable importance at this time.

Regards,

Ray Norman

zingHOUSEunlimited

The lifestyle design enterprise and research network

 Trevallyn TAS. 7250

End Message