QUESTION ... Submitted July 17 2024
CONTEXT NOTE
Given that apparently the QVMAG has not lodged on the record a financial progress report so far in 2024 it is concerning that the ratepayers and taxpayers who underwrite the institution’s recurrent funding do not have access to this information. Moreover, it seems that Councillors do not have ready access to this information either which inhibits them in their default governance role for the institution.
Best practice suggests that an operation of the QVMAG’s scale should be lodging such reports within 21 days of end of a reporting period – typically quarterly. Given that the city’s ratepayers pay a hidden levy to support the QVMAG’s recurrent operations it appears that best practice fiscal reporting for this operation cum cost centre is not anything that either you as Councillors and in turn the ratepayers’ are mindful of or regard as being a serious concern.
THE QUESTION 1
Given the backgrounding set out in the context to this question, will Councillors now ensure that the QVMAG places on the record quarterly line item financial progress reports that clearly demonstrate that the operation is expending ratepayers’ and taxpayers’ funds for the purpose for which they are intended and in a timely way?
QUESTION ... Submitted July 17 2024
CONTEXT NOTE
Given the Councils’ commitment to implementing a QVMAG Futures Plan, and that this plan seems to be based on an assessment of the current state of affairs and the institution’s purposefulness, it appears that there may well be important information that is not readily available and that has gone on unreported for quite some time.
This is the ‘metrics’ to do with the unavoidable recurrent costs involved in doing business which closely isolates the variables involved in the return –fiscal, dividends social and cultural – on equity.
Sets of metrics are commonly used to track areas of concern: critical to quality; defects and weaknesses; prcgram capability; variation; stability of an operation; and design factors.
Currently, there are two sets of metrics that are apparently going unreported:
- The recurrent cost of providing and maintain ‘the venue’ and number of individual physical visitations for each campus – estimated approx. 10 years ago at something in the order of $50 per visitation; and
- The recurrent cost of providing and maintaining ‘the digital venue’ and the number of virtual engagements; and that is
without blurring the two sets of data or conflating one with the other.
Strategically this information is required in order to plan appropriately short term or long term. Likewise, managerially this class of information is required in developing and managing appropriate cost-effective programs.
Moreover, if the QVMAG is to move towards an entrepreneurial footing this class of information is vital when it comes to planning strategically and winningsponsorships, research grants, etc.
THE QUESTION
Will Council publish the QVMAG’s metrics now and on a quarterly basis until the operation transitions to a Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG) and after that require that QVMAG CLG reports its metrics quarterly as a condition of ongoing recurrent funding in open competition with other operations?
CONTEXT NOTE ... NOT PUBLISHED IN THE AGENDA
Given that the Queen Victoria Museum & Art Gallery being a City of Launceston Cost Centre with the elected Councillors effectively being the institution’s ‘governing body’ and with ‘the institution’being allowed to operate without Councillors’ playing a governance role. This is demonstrated by:
- Councillors allowing the city’s ‘Executive Management’ to deem that it has a blended management cum governance function without the appropriate delegated authority; and
- The ‘Council’ appointing an advisory body upon whose advice may or may not accepted as having governance or management relevance if-and-when it reports to Open Council; and
- The advisory body NOT being either required to nor enabled to report to Open Council within a set timeframe; and
- The institution NOT reporting quarterly in regard to the instruction’s financial performance to an Open Council; albeit that
- The institution expends ‘public monies’ provided by the city’s ratepayers and Tasmania’s taxpayers by-and-large without appropriate accountability.
Against the background that the ‘elected representatives’ asCouncillors are functionally ill equipped to be the Governors/Trustees of a cultural intuition (QVMAG) in exactly the same way as the Tasmanian Government’s Ministry is ill equipped to be the Governors/Trustees of a cultural intuition, namely the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (TMAG Hobart). The status quo is unsustainable against the background that shift to the QVMG transitioning to being a Company Limited by Guarantee is the advice provided to Council on the record in June 2022.
Acknowledging this, the Tasmanian Government ‘appoints’ a Board of Trustees for the TMAG. Launceston’s Councils over time has not followed this model. Therefore, the QVMAG operates as a cultural intuition that functions ‘without a functional governing body’ that has a membership with the appropriate expertise and domain knowledge. Arguably this puts the QVMAG’s priceless collections at risk by extension. Clearly this is an unsatisfactory and untenable circumstance brought about by Council’s Management for unfathomable reasons over time.
Council's Response
8.1.5. Public Questions on Notice - Ray Norman - QVMAG Financial Reporting and
Metrics Data, and Resource Recovery - 17 July 2024
FILE NO: SF6381
AUTHOR: Lorraine Wyatt (Council and Committees Officer)
APPROVER: Sam Johnson OAM (Chief Executive Officer)
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES:
The following questions, submitted to Council on 17 July 2024 by Ray Norman, have been answered by Shane Fitzgerald (General Manager Creative Arts and Cultural Services), and Shane Eberhardt (General Manager Infrastructure and Assets Network).
Questions:
1. Given the backgrounding set out in the context to this question, will Councillors now ensure that the QVMAG places on the record quarterly line item financial progress reports that clearly demonstrate that the operation is expending ratepayers’ and taxpayers’ funds for the purpose for which they are intended and in a timely way?
Response:
The administration cannot speak on behalf of Councillors. We encourage you to refer
to all previous answers relating to this matter.
2. Will Council publish the QVMAG’s metrics now and on a quarterly basis until the operation transitions to a Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG) and after that require that QVMAG CLG reports its metrics quarterly as a condition of ongoing recurrent funding in open competition with other operations?
Response:
QVMAG will continue to report in accordance with its adopted governance framework.
We encourage you to refer to all previous answers relating to this matter.
COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY 11 JULY 2024 1.00 PM
8.1.1. Public Questions on Notice - Ray Norman - Homelessness, Environmental Sustainability, Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery (QVMAG) - 21 June 2024
FILE NO: SF6381/ / SF7000 / SF2244 / SF4729
AUTHOR: Lorraine Wyatt (Council and Committees Officer)
APPROVER: Sam Johnson (Chief Executive Officer)
QUESTION 3. Will Council NOW take immediate steps to ensure the appointment of a qualified Commissioner to:
1. Enact the advice to Council in 2022; and
2. Accordingly ensure that public monies, donations, and sponsorships are used for
their intended purpose; and
3. Accordingly protect the priceless QVMAG collections; and
4. Ensure that researchers – academic and citizen researchers – have appropriate
access to the QVMAG collections and be formally engaged with the institution; and
5. That cultural producers can engage proactively with the institution at multiple levels.
City of Launceston Council Meeting Agenda Thursday 11 July 2024 Page 15
Response:
Council have adopted a Futures Plan for QVMAG, which has undergone a process of
appropriate engagement. The Futures Plan has been formally adopted by Council, and forms the basis of actions and direction for the Council to move forward in supporting QVMAG.
NB: The question is addressed to "Mayor and all Councillors" and it has been responded to by Council Officers who are not representatives of the city's citizens and ratepayers.
No comments:
Post a Comment