QAVMAG Accountability

Good morning Robert,

Recently, within the last weeks, you have responded to the critique that Launceston’s rates are $300 to $400 more than for equivalent properties elsewhere in Tasmania, that is properties receiving approximately equivalent servicing. You, reportedly, offered the explanation that this was because Launceston had, paraphrases, a museum, a regional aquatic centre and facilities like York Park.

Today is the first regular Council meeting for 2016 and yet again, as is typical, the agenda does not present anything for report in regard to the QVMAG. This raises a series of questions such as:

1. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to the institutions financial progress/performance half way into the financial year?
2. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to program planning and delivery at this time?
3. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to acquisition and/or the accession of material to QVMAG collections?
4. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to the institution’s marketing effectiveness or otherwise?
5. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to the institution’s research outcomes and inputs?
6. Is it the case that there nothing to report on or review in regard to recommendations for policy reviews?
   

And there are more issues still that one might expect would deserve reporting upon, or that would require a review, at this time and/or at other  key times throughout the year.

Serially, Council agendas do not present constituents with the opportunity to witness their representatives holding themselves, an the QVMAG operation, to account.

Given that in regards to a great many ratepayers’ their rates bill includes something in the order of 10% which goes to supporting the QVMAG is the status quo either defendable or anything that represents functional accountability?

Thus, is not the regular meeting of Council, the QVMAG’s Trustees, an appropriate time for the institution, and Council, to be reporting on and reviewing such matters pertinent to their investment in the institution?

Moreover, on the evidence, is not both Council and the institution holding itself beyond the reach of accountability to not only Council constituents but also the institution’s funding agencies, sponsors, donors, et al?

I look forward to receiving any information you can provide that might substantiate an alternative view to the one implied here.

Regards,

Ray

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

CLICK HERE: http://www.launceston.tas.gov.au/lcc/index.php?c=69