FW: URGENT & CONFIDENTIAL: A Matter of Concern

Forwarded Message
From: Mayor <Mayor@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 03:27:46 +0000
To: Ray Norman <raynorman@eftel.net.au>
Subject: RE: URGENT & CONFIDENTIAL: A Matter of Concern

Hi Ray
 
I confirm the Council did conduct an independent investigation in relation to an allegation of bullying acting upon the legal advice received.  Council acted on the recommendations made.  There was no "cover-up".  This, as you can well understand, is a legal matter and I am unable to provide any further information to you on this matter.  Thank you for your concerns.
 
Kind regards
 

Albert van Zetten I Mayor I Launceston City Council
T 03 6323 3101 I F 03 6323 3125 I www.launceston.tas.gov.au <http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au/>


From: Ray Norman [mailto:raynorman@eftel.net.au]
Sent: Thursday, 21 August 2014 2:03 PM
To: Mayor; Alderman Jeremy Ball
Subject: URGENT & CONFIDENTIAL: A Matter of Concern

CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Albert & Jeremy,

Yesterday I received a phone call during which I was informed of an alleged “cover-up” of bullying going on within Council’s administration. Given my personal experience recently of being defamed, threatened and discriminated against I have to at least wounder about the veracity of this claim. Why? Well despite clear evidence that what I personally experienced was inappropriate, and despite seeking acknowledgement of that, and some form of redress, neither has been offered me. That Council might indeed be a more toxic environment and workplace than I have experienced does seem plausible in this context.

Indeed gaining acknowledgement of the veracity of an issue is something I’ve experienced considerable difficulty with over time with LCC. I’ve been patronised and informed that I’m entitled to my beliefs which in the end is of no assistance whatsoever in arriving at some kind satisfactory outcome.

With the eve of Council elections upon us the question of accountability, and its functionality, does arise. How can ratepayers and residents be assured that Launceston City Council is indeed a trustworthy administration taking best possible care of community assets if Aldermen are prepared to try and cover-up the extent of toxicity prevailing under their watch?

I write to give you the opportunity to give me good reason as to why I should not draw my own concerns and experiences  to the appropriate authorities at this time. I look forward to your earliest possible response.

Regards,

Ray

Ray Norman
<zingHOUSEunlimited>
The lifestyle design enterprise and research network

PH: 03-6334 2176
EMAIL 1: raynorman@eftel.net.au <mailto:raynorman@eftel.net.au>
40 Delamere Crescent Trevallyn TAS. 7250
WEBsite: http://www.raynorman7250.blogspot.com <http://www.raynorman7250.blogspot.com>
NOTICE: this message, and any attachments, may contain privileged and confidential information intended for
the exclusive use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not
disseminate, copy or take any action in relation to the message. If you have received this message in error,
please immediately notify the sender at the above address and delete all copies of the message
The information in this email is absolutely confidential and commercial-in-confidence
 protocols apply to that information that may have a commercial application.

Furthermore, the intellectual property rights of the author(s) apply in accord with Australian Copyright and Moral Rights Laws.

 <https://twitter.com/LtonCityCouncil>  <http://www.youtube.com/user/LauncestonCtyCouncil>  <http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au>  <http://yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au/>

LAUNCESTON
Named Australia's most family friendly city by Suncorp 2013.
Named Tasmania's top eTown by Google 2013.
Home to Harvest Launceston, named Australia's Best Harvest Market by ABC Delicious magazine 2013.
Home to City Park, named in Australia's top ten parks by TripAdvisor 2013.
Keep Australia Beautiful - Community Action and Partnerships 2013
Tasmanian Tourism Award - Visitor Information and Services 2013
LGAT General Excellence Award - State of the Art Launceston Visitor Information Centre 2013

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

FW: QVMAG Acquisition, Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

Forwarded Message
From: Mayor <Mayor@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 03:34:48 +0000
To: "Ray Norman (raynorman@eftel.net.au)" <raynorman@eftel.net.au>
Subject: QVMAG Acquisition,  Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

Hi Ray

Attached is letter in response to email below.

Kind regards


Albert van Zetten I Mayor I Launceston City Council
T 03 6323 3101 I F 03 6323 3125 I www.launceston.tas.gov.au <http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au/>


From: Ray Norman [mailto:raynorman@eftel.net.au]
Sent: Monday, 18 August 2014 3:33 PM
To: [MGAB]_1
Subject: FW: AGAIN: QVMAG Acquisition, Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

FYI ONLY
NO ACTION ANTICIPATABLE
Forwarded Message
From: Ray Norman <raynorman@eftel.net.au>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 15:42:01 +1000
To: Mayor <Mayor@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Cc: LCC Records <records@launceston.tas.gov.au>, Richard Mulvaney <Richard.Mulvaney@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Subject: AGAIN: QVMAG Acquisition,  Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

TO: Mayor & Aldermen,

I had hoped to have at least received an acknowledgement of the receipt of this letter. Moreover, some acknowledgement of the significance of the matters raised and advice on what action/s if any are being considered would also have been appropriate by now I believe.

As the QVMAG’s Trustees, it is disappointing to see the custodians of collections allegedly valued at $230 million plus treating a matter like this with such scant regard. It’s especially so as it is a matter that falls totally within Council’s/Aldermen’s  bailiwick given that is a policy matter – and a matter to do with ’trust’. It’s matter clearly outside management’s operational  responsibilities and authority except in an advisory capacity.

Undoubtedly there needs to be wider advice sought from within the field given the weight of responsibility falling to Aldermen – the custodians of approx 23% of Tasmania’s cultural assets. And, given that Council is seeking a change in State Govt. funding to protect ratepayers from further imposts, I imagined that there would be some urgency exercised in regard to matters such as this.

Furthermore, against the background that the Auditor General has already raised concerns about the collection’s administration, and the adequacy of its records, I am concerned that this matter seems to be regarded in such a cavalier manner. The most concerning thing is that it appears that action here somehow seems to be regarded as being discretionary.

Again, I look forward to your early advice.

Regards,

Ray Norman

Ray Norman  |<zingHOUSEunlimited> | PH: 03-6334 2176 | EMAIL: raynorman@eftel.net.au |40 Delamere Crescent Trevallyn TAS. 7250


A research network dedicated to developing more inclusive 21st C understandings & imaginings of place
Prof. Bill Boyd: Review Editor & Project Coordinator
Ray Norman : Director & Project Coordinator (Tasmania)
eMAIL: nudgelbar-tas@7250.net
BLOG: http://thenudgelbahinstitute.blogspot.com.au/
AUDITING PLACEDNESS
http://auditingplacedness.blogspot.com.au/

Forwarded Message
From: Ray Norman <raynorman@eftel.net.au>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:25:11 +1000
To: Mayor <Mayor@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Cc: Richard Mulvaney <Richard.Mulvaney@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Subject: QVMAG Acquisition,  Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

TO:  MAYOR & ALDERMEN

Sometime during August last year, and again earlier this year, I asked both the Director and the General Manager about the QVMAG’s Acquisition and Deaccession Policy and its relevance to world’s best practice. I was informed that two past policies – Acquisition &  Deaccession – had been combined to form a single policy document. I have been provided with a copy of this combined document dated June 2013 that I understand to be still in its draft form a year on.

I believe that this draft falls well short of  best practice on the grounds that:

1. Given that it is a  policy document it needed to have been initiated by the Trustees/Aldermen with a set timeframe and in fact it has initiated by QVMAG’s management without any hint of there being an expected completion date  – albeit that management may need to have an input;
2. It appears to be founded on an outdated(?) policy document that should have been approved by the Trustees/Aldermen but it appears that it was not. By extension, this means  that the new draft also lacks accountability at the outset;
3. From the perspective of collection development, it should be definite and relevant to current understandings in museology and cultural practice but it is ambiguous and anarchic;
4. From the perspective current cultural understandings it should reflect current understandings in it's drafting but it is a poor representation of current museum practice and cultural theory;
5. The criteria for the inclusion of scientific material in the collections should be specificic but the draft is somewhat ambiguous and far too open to interpretation;
6. In respect to deaccession, the processes documented should reflect best practice in museology and accountability but it falls short of that and specifically so in regard to accountability;
7. In respect to deaccession, the methodologies in regard to determining ‘value’ should be multidimensional – cultural, social, scientific & fiscal –  whereas value is projected as  being entirely money based – and based on inappropriately low amounts;
8. In respect to either the accessioning or deaccessioning of a collection item/object the decision-making should rest with the Trustees/Aldermen, where accountability actually rests, but it is entirely, an inappropriately, placed in the hands of management.

Given that a museum’s and/or art gallery’s most important policy is its:

1. Accession Policy in that it determines how recurrent, acquisition and project funding, will be employed thus ensuring the institution's integrity and ability to meet its purpose;
2. Deaccession Policy in so much as it ensures that there is true accountability to its funders and donors – government, corporate & private – in accord with ethical standards; and
3. On the evidence provided by the draft document the QVMAG’s policy/s in regard Accession and Deaccession arguably falls well short of the appropriate professional standards the institution should be upholding.

Questions arising:

1. When will LCC, as the QVMAG’s Trustees, move to ensure that the institution’s Acquisition and Deaccession Policies meet professional and best practice standards, ideally world’s best practice?
2. What advice will LCC seek and/or rely upon to ensure that the policies do indeed have currency and at the same time meet best practice standards?
3. What importance do the Trustees/Aldermen place upon these policies meeting best practice in a national or international context?
4. What does the Council need to do to initiate an appropriate audit to ensure that best practices are adheared to and credible accountability is in place in regard to collections allededly valued at $230 million plus?
5. In the context of seeking additional State Government funding for the QVMAG:

   * What action is Council taking to regularise the QVMAG’s operational model relevant to best practice in museology looking ahead to higher levels of accountability?
    * What processes has Council put in place to ensure the protection of the QVMAG’s collections and programming looking ahead to potential funding constraints?
    * What advice is Council going to rely upon in negotiating new relationships between the QVMAG, other regional musingplaces,the Sate Government and other funding agencies?

I look forward to Council’s early advice given recent developments in Tasmania relevant to musingplace funding and their accountability.

Regards,

Ray Norman

Ray Norman
<zingHOUSEunlimited>
The lifestyle design enterprise and research network

PH: 03-6334 2176
EMAIL 1: raynorman@eftel.net.au
EMAIL 2: ray@7250.net
40 Delamere Crescent Trevallyn TAS. 7250
WEBsite: http://www.raynorman7250.blogspot.com

Prof. Bill Boyd: Review Editor & Project Coordinator
Ray Norman : Director & Project Coordinator (Tasmania)
eMAIL: nudgelbar-tas@7250.net
BLOG: http://thenudgelbahinstitute.blogspot.com.au/
AUDITING PLACEDNESS
http://auditingplacedness.blogspot.com.au/

------ End of Forwarded Message

 <https://twitter.com/LtonCityCouncil>  <http://www.youtube.com/user/LauncestonCtyCouncil>  <http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au>  <http://yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au/>

LAUNCESTON
Named Australia's most family friendly city by Suncorp 2013.
Named Tasmania's top eTown by Google 2013.
Home to Harvest Launceston, named Australia's Best Harvest Market by ABC Delicious magazine 2013.
Home to City Park, named in Australia's top ten parks by TripAdvisor 2013.
Keep Australia Beautiful - Community Action and Partnerships 2013
Tasmanian Tourism Award - Visitor Information and Services 2013
LGAT General Excellence Award - State of the Art Launceston Visitor Information Centre 2013

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

FW: QVMAG Acquisition, Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

Hi!

I’ve been doing a a kind of random checking of online accession an deaccession policy/law and it is disturbingly inconsistent across institutions. Those institution that do have something representing near to best practice are below at random. Arguably the legislative/regulatory environment is built on trust but there are millions, more likely billions, of dollars worth of  Australians’ cultural assets languishing away in collections, and if the QVMAG is an example, rather poorly protected – relying upon some kind of misguided trust.

I think that it would be a very smart move on LCC’s behalf to draw this situation to the relevant Ministers’ attention, and Arts Tasmania as the key Advisory body, to attempt to put in place come ‘model policies’. TMAG has some good policies but there are missing elements. In any even TMAG policies would form a substantial foundation for a Tasmanian Statewide Model an one that QVMAG and any future Trustees could/should refer to.

The strategy here being that LCC would be seen as taking a positive initiative towards addressing the ‘woollyness’ of Tasmanian museum/musingplace practice towards the sector making a greater contribution to CULTURAL TOURISM and COMMUNITY CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT. Clearly there needs to be some regulation, perhaps legislation, here to protect the Tasmanian communities investment in public collections.

$230plu million in QMAG collections, goodness know what in TMAG’s, etc. etc. If this was a superannuation fund would the carelessness evident here be as easily dismissed (put aside?!) as it appears to be at QVMAG and probably across the board. It might well be a case of stealing the march for funding??!!

Ray

TMAG
Deaccession Decorative Arts: http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/collections_and_research/policies/deaccession_and_disposal_policy_2008_art_and_decorative_arts_collection

Deaccession Indigenous Culture: http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/collections_and_research/policies/deaccession_and_disposal_policy_indigenous_cultures

Deaccession Bio-Diversity: http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/collections_and_research/policies/biodiversity_deaccession_policy_2008

Deaccession Cultural Heritage:  http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/collections_and_research/policies/biodiversity_deaccession_policy_2008

Powerhouse Museum
Deaccession: http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/pdf/about/policies/Deaccessioning.pdf

Australian Museum
Deaccession: http://www.nma.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/1447/POL-C-035_Collections_Deaccessioning_and_disposal-5.0.pdf

National Gallery of Australia
Deaccession: http://www.collectionslaw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/national-gallery-of-australia.pdf
QVMAG
Destructive Sampling : http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/upfiles/qvmag/cont/destructive_sampling_policy_qvmag__version_2_dec_2011.pdf

Forwarded Message
From: Ray Norman <raynorman@eftel.net.au>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:25:11 +1000
To: Mayor <Mayor@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Cc: Richard Mulvaney <Richard.Mulvaney@launceston.tas.gov.au>
Subject: QVMAG Acquisition,  Deaccession Policies & Future Directions

TO:  MAYOR & ALDERMEN

Sometime during August last year, and again earlier this year, I asked both the Director and the General Manager about the QVMAG’s Acquisition and Deaccession Policy and its relevance to world’s best practice. I was informed that two past policies – Acquisition &  Deaccession – had been combined to form a single policy document. I have been provided with a copy of this combined document dated June 2013 that I understand to be still in its draft form a year on.

I believe that this draft falls well short of  best practice on the grounds that:

1.  Given that it is a  policy document it needed to have been initiated by the Trustees/Aldermen with a set timeframe and in fact it has initiated by QVMAG’s management without any hint of there being an expected completion date  – albeit that management may need to have an input;
2. It appears to be founded on an outdated(?) policy document that should have been approved by the Trustees/Aldermen but it appears that it was not. By extension, this means  that the new draft also lacks accountability at the outset;
3. From the perspective of collection development, it should be definite and relevant to current understandings in museology and cultural practice but it is ambiguous and anarchic;
4. From the perspective current cultural understandings it should reflect current understandings in it's drafting but it is a poor representation of current museum practice and cultural theory;
5. The criteria for the inclusion of scientific material in the collections should be specificic but the draft is somewhat ambiguous and far too open to interpretation;
6. In respect to deaccession, the processes documented should reflect best practice in museology and accountability but it falls short of that and specifically so in regard to accountability;
7. In respect to deaccession, the methodologies in regard to determining ‘value’ should be multidimensional – cultural, social, scientific & fiscal –  whereas value is projected as  being entirely money based – and based on inappropriately low amounts;
8. In respect to either the accessioning or deaccessioning of a collection item/object the decision-making should rest with the Trustees/Aldermen, where accountability actually rests, but it is entirely, an inappropriately, placed in the hands of management.
   

Given that a museum’s and/or art gallery’s most important policy is its:

1. Accession Policy in that it determines how recurrent, acquisition and project funding, will be employed thus ensuring the institution's integrity and ability to meet its purpose;
2. Deaccession Policy in so much as it ensures that there is true accountability to its funders and donors – government, corporate & private – in accord with ethical standards; and
3. On the evidence provided by the draft document the QVMAG’s policy/s in regard Accession and Deaccession arguably falls well short of the appropriate professional standards the institution should be upholding.
   

Questions arising:

1. When will LCC, as the QVMAG’s Trustees, move to ensure that the institution’s Acquisition and Deaccession Policies meet professional and best practice standards, ideally world’s best practice?
2. What advice will LCC seek and/or rely upon to ensure that the policies do indeed have currency and at the same time meet best practice standards?
3. What importance do the Trustees/Aldermen place upon these policies meeting best practice in a national or international context?
4. What does the Council need to do to initiate an appropriate audit to ensure that best practices are adheared to and credible accountability is in place in regard to collections allededly valued at $230 million plus?
5. In the context of seeking additional State Government funding for the QVMAG:
   

    * What action is Council taking to regularise the QVMAG’s operational model relevant to best practice in museology looking ahead to higher levels of accountability?
    * What processes has Council put in place to ensure the protection of the QVMAG’s collections and programming looking ahead to potential funding constraints?
    * What advice is Council going to rely upon in negotiating new relationships between the QVMAG, other regional musingplaces,the Sate Government and other funding agencies?

I look forward to Council’s early advice given recent developments in Tasmania relevant to musingplace funding and their accountability.

Regards,

Ray Norman

Ray Norman
<zingHOUSEunlimited>
The lifestyle design enterprise and research network

PH: 03-6334 2176
EMAIL 1: raynorman@eftel.net.au
EMAIL 2: ray@7250.net
40 Delamere Crescent Trevallyn TAS. 7250
WEBsite: http://www.raynorman7250.blogspot.com

Prof. Bill Boyd: Review Editor & Project Coordinator
Ray Norman : Director & Project Coordinator (Tasmania)
eMAIL: nudgelbar-tas@7250.net
BLOG: http://thenudgelbahinstitute.blogspot.com.au/
AUDITING PLACEDNESS
http://auditingplacedness.blogspot.com.au/

------ End of Forwarded Message