To the people of Launceston

I believe the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery (QVMAG) is one of Launceston’s great institutions. I’m standing for Council to see it protected, strengthened and supported to remain ambitious. I would like children and families to continue walking through its doors without having to decide whether they can afford an admission fee. I would like its extraordinary collections cared for properly, and its exhibitions, research and education programs given every opportunity to grow. I also want to acknowledge the people who work there and the expertise they bring. I would like to see them supported with the capacity and resources needed to help QVMAG continue developing as an even stronger cultural institution for Launceston, this region, and our state.

I also believe Launceston ratepayers deserve a fair go. Those two things are not in conflict. The question is not whether we can afford to have QVMAG. The better question is how we build a more durable funding model so that this important regional and Tasmanian institution is not so heavily dependent on the ratepayers of a single municipality. Council’s 2025/26 budget records an operational deficit for QVMAG of just over $7 million. That is a significant and continuing call on City of Launceston finances.

A lot of good work has already been done

We do not need to start this conversation from scratch. In 2022, City of Launceston unanimously endorsed the QVMAG Futures Plan. Since then, QVMAG has developed detailed strategic frameworks covering governance, commercial revenue, philanthropy, exhibitions, audiences, collections and long-term financial sustainability. There is much in that work that I support.

The existing strategy recognises that QVMAG needs a broader funding base. It envisages increased State Government support, stronger commercial and own-source revenue, philanthropy and sponsorship, a long-term Futures Fund and consideration of a different governance structure. So I do not think the next Council needs another expensive exercise telling us that the present funding model is difficult. We need to take the work that has already been done, examine what remains appropriate, resolve the outstanding questions and get on with implementation.

Set a four-year financial objective

I would like Council and QVMAG to work towards a clear objective over the next term: substantially reducing the amount of QVMAG’s annual operating cost that ultimately has to be carried by Launceston ratepayers. I think reducing that burden by around half over four years is a reasonable ambition to put on the table.

To be clear, that does not mean finding $3.5 million in cuts. It certainly does not mean cutting jobs, closing galleries, diminishing the collection or putting a general admission charge on the front door. It means changing the funding equation. Additional funding needs to come from several directions: a fairer contribution from the Tasmanian Government, substantially stronger own-source revenue, philanthropy and sponsorship, partnerships, a long-term investment or Futures Fund, and genuine operational efficiencies. No single measure will solve the problem, but together they can make a substantial difference.

Tasmania should carry a fairer share

This is one of the most important conversations Council should have with the Tasmanian Government. QVMAG is owned and operated by City of Launceston, but its significance extends well beyond our municipal boundary. Its collections tell Tasmanian stories. Its natural sciences work has research significance. It contributes to education, tourism and the cultural life of Northern Tasmania. QVMAG describes itself as Australia’s largest regional museum.

Its own strategic framework has already proposed a substantially increased annual State Government contribution and identifies $3.7 million as a target. I think that provides a sensible basis for serious negotiation. The objective should not be to shift responsibility from one level of government to another. Local government should continue to contribute substantially to QVMAG, but the funding partnership should better reflect the institution’s regional and state significance. I would like Council, QVMAG and the Tasmanian Government to negotiate a long-term funding agreement rather than revisit the same financial problem budget after budget.

Keep the front door free

I strongly support continuing free general admission. A public museum should be somewhere a child, family, pensioner, student or visitor can wander into without first considering the household budget. Free general admission, however, does not mean everything QVMAG does must be free. There is considerable room to grow earned revenue while protecting universal access.

Major touring exhibitions can be ticketed where appropriate. Membership programs can grow. Venue hire, retail, food and beverage, events, education programs, corporate partnerships, sponsorship and philanthropy can all contribute. QVMAG’s own Commercial Framework recognises the need to significantly increase own-source revenue, and I would like to see that pursued ambitiously.

I would also love to see experiences such as Night at the Museum return and expand. Imagine QVMAG after dark, filled with children and families exploring exhibitions, science, history and the collection in completely different ways. Special experiences can attract modest charges while everyday access remains free. The economic benefit does not stop at QVMAG’s doors either. A major exhibition that brings visitors to Launceston also supports accommodation, hospitality, retail and other businesses across the city.

Grow revenue before reaching for the red pen

The word “efficiency” understandably makes workers nervous because too often it becomes shorthand for reducing staff. That is not how I think we should approach QVMAG. The first questions should be: where can we generate more revenue, where can we eliminate unnecessary costs without diminishing capability, and where can technology, procurement, energy efficiency, partnerships or better use of buildings improve the financial position?

The people who work at QVMAG are not simply a cost on a spreadsheet. They are a large part of its institutional capability. They curate exhibitions, preserve collections, undertake research, educate children, develop programs, attract visitors, build partnerships and create the experiences from which greater revenue can come. Removing too much capability in pursuit of short-term savings can make long-term financial sustainability harder, not easier. The objective should be a stronger QVMAG with a stronger balance sheet.

Think regionally

QVMAG also has an opportunity to deepen its role as a Northern Tasmanian institution. That does not mean sending neighbouring councils an invoice. It means asking what we can build together. Could councils and tourism organisations jointly attract and market major exhibitions? Could we create stronger education partnerships across the region? Could QVMAG work more deeply with UTAS, schools, businesses and cultural organisations? Could regional partnerships strengthen applications for government funding, philanthropy and sponsorship?

A regional institution should build strong regional relationships, and those relationships should help expand both its reach and its financial resilience.

Governance is a means, not the objective

There has also been considerable discussion about moving QVMAG towards a company limited by guarantee with a skills-based board. That proposal did not appear from nowhere. It formed a major part of the Futures Plan endorsed by Council in 2022. There may be significant advantages to greater operational independence, charitable status, specialist governance and greater capacity to attract philanthropic and commercial investment.

But changing the organisational chart is not, by itself, financial reform. Before Council proceeds, I would want clear answers to some basic questions. Will a different governance model attract material new revenue? Will it improve QVMAG’s commercial and philanthropic capability? What financial commitments will remain with Council? Who owns and protects the collection? What happens to staff? How is public accountability preserved? What are the establishment and ongoing governance costs?

The structure should follow the purpose. If an arm’s-length model helps QVMAG become stronger, more independent and more financially sustainable while preserving public ownership and accountability, it warrants serious consideration. If ratepayers simply provide essentially the same subsidy through a different organisational structure, we will have changed governance without fixing the underlying problem.

A fair go for QVMAG

My starting point is not that QVMAG costs too much. My starting point is that we should build a funding model worthy of the institution we want QVMAG to become. That means protecting free general admission and the collection, respecting and drawing on the expertise of QVMAG staff, growing revenue rather than automatically cutting capability, asking the State Government to make a contribution proportionate to QVMAG’s importance, developing regional, commercial and philanthropic partnerships, and progressing the long-term financial reforms that Council and QVMAG have already spent years developing.

Over the next four years, I would like us to work towards substantially reducing QVMAG’s reliance on Launceston rates revenue while making QVMAG more, not less, ambitious. That is what I mean by a fair go for QVMAG: a fair go for the institution, a fair go for the people who work there, a fair go for everyone who should continue to be able to walk through its doors, and a fairer sharing of responsibility for the Launceston ratepayers who have supported this extraordinary institution for generations.

And perhaps there is another conversation worth having. QVMAG is one of Launceston’s defining cultural institutions, yet our city’s name does not appear in its title. Is it time to consider whether the Launceston Museum and Art Gallery, LMAG, better reflects the institution and the city it calls home?

paul mallett
Candidate for Mayor and Councillor, City of Launceston
vibrantnation.au

Letter to the Editor

A fair go for QVMAG

Dear Editor,

QVMAG is one of Launceston’s great institutions. I would like to see it protected, strengthened and supported to be more ambitious, while keeping general admission free and ensuring its collections, exhibitions, research and education programs continue to grow.

But Launceston ratepayers also deserve a fair go. Council’s 2025/26 budget records an operational deficit for QVMAG of just over $7 million. I do not think the answer is to cut jobs, diminish the collection, close galleries or charge people simply to walk through the front door. I think the answer is to build a stronger museum with a broader and more sustainable funding base.

That means negotiating a fairer long-term contribution from the Tasmanian Government, growing commercial and philanthropic revenue, attracting more major exhibitions and creating more experiences people are willing to pay a little extra to enjoy. I would love to see more Night at the Museum-style events, QVMAG opening after dark for families, special exhibitions and experiences, while keeping everyday access free.

I would also like QVMAG to work more closely with neighbouring councils, tourism organisations, UTAS, schools and businesses. Rather than simply asking others to contribute to the cost, let’s work together to attract exhibitions, build tourism packages, expand education programs, seek sponsorship and promote QVMAG as one of Northern Tasmania’s great visitor experiences.

Over the next four years, I would like Council to work towards substantially reducing QVMAG’s reliance on Launceston rates revenue while making the institution more, not less, ambitious. That means growing revenue before reaching for the red pen, strengthening partnerships, and making sure any governance changes actually improve QVMAG’s financial position rather than simply changing who manages the same problem.

That is what a fair go for QVMAG looks like to me: protect what makes it special, keep the front door open, bring more people through it, generate more revenue around it, and share the responsibility for supporting it more fairly.

And perhaps there is one more conversation worth having. Is it time to consider whether the Launceston Museum and Art Gallery, LMAG, better reflects the institution and the city it calls home?

paul mallett

Candidate for Mayor and Councillor, City of Launceston