• Oak Lodge, on The National Trust website, here
At the time of year when we celebrate the Australian notion of a fair go, Richmond businesses and residents wonder why they have been singled out to pay for the maintenance of Tasmania’s built heritage.
The National Trust of Australia (Tasmania) has decided to sell Oak Lodge, a property that was gifted to the community under the care of the National Trust by Miss Muriel Horsfall and has been operated by the Coal River Valley Historical Society as a local museum. Much of the Richmond community is dependent on tourism for its livelihood. Loss of a local attraction affects all of Richmond.
Unlike the National Trust in other parts of Australia and the world, the National Trust in Tasmania is effectively a Government business enterprise set up by Act of Parliament in 2006 and is run by a Government-appointed board. The Tasmanian Government transfers its heritage properties under lease to the National Trust (Tasmania) who then sell properties that have been gifted to them by private individuals in order to maintain the Government-owned properties. In this manner, the State Government circumvents its obligation to maintain our heritage at no cost to its Treasury. (see Leo Schofield “Historic home almost history” Mercury Saturday Magazine, 26 January, 2013)
The State Government should spread the costs of looking after our heritage across the whole community, not just penalise a town that is significantly dependent on heritage and tourism.
If you gift a heritage property or chattels or money to the National Trust of Australia (Tasmania), believing that you are helping to preserve our heritage then think again. You are actually helping to fund the State Government.
• A Save Oak Lodge public meeting will be held at the Richmond Town Hall on Wednesday 30th January, 2013 at 7:30 p.m.
Michael Wadsley
Richmond
Tasmania
Australia 7025
Ros Barnett
January 26, 2013 at 11:52
Recently I have been researching models for ways we might fund the restoration and maintenance of boats, and I looked at the National Trust and other similar organisations, here and further afield, to see how our land based built heritage is funded. Although I’m a long way from finishing my search I am noticing that projects, ie properties, that have a ‘real’ purpose and high hours of use and numbers of feet over the threshold are the winners. Sometimes that means a cafe or gallery on site, sometimes it means leasing to a private family or corporation. Whatever the model, the capital costs of restoration have to be set aside from the cost of running and maintenance over time, and that is the part that government should contribute to. Otherwise we would never be able to save anything.
phill Parsons
January 27, 2013 at 08:41
Leaving something to an organization is a risk without a binding agreement enforceable at law.
You may embarass the government for a moment but uless Oak Lodge is a key item and a popular tourist attraction maintaing Richmond’s heritage will be passed to the owners.
The consultation process must give some experience of the feeling fo the first Tasmanians. Time for a new Heritage Act that shows respect not the lip service we see today.
Michael Wadsley
January 27, 2013 at 10:44
The ANZ bank have a history of funding dubious projects in Tasmania. It has come to light from a title search that the ANZ bank holds a mortgage over the property, Oak Lodge, Richmond. The National Trust of Australia (Tasmania) has now decided to sell Oak Lodge.
What is the ANZ doing to own a mortgage on a National Trust property that is most likely to be non-profit and has little profit-making capability to service a loan? What sort of business case did the National Trust (Tasmania) make to ANZ in order to obtain the mortgage? How many other Tasmanian National Trust properties mortgaged? Are the ANZ so ethically challenged as to take on any business? Did the ANZ review its mortgage on Oak Lodge when the Tasmanian Government took over the National Trust in Tasmania? If not, they should do so now as a matter of urgency.
The writer is a member of the National Trust and is a shareholder in ANZ.
Michael Wadsley
January 27, 2013 at 10:48
The State Government and the National Trust of Australia (Tasmania), seem to have either forgotten or learned nothing from the Entally House debacle of 2002-2003. At the time speakers said they were angry that the State Government and the National Trust had not set up an open process to determine the future of the historic house. Making the process open to public discussion was then said to be a triumph for ordinary people against a mentality that secret deals and a denial of public interest were acceptable.
The processes employed by the National Trust of Australia (Tasmania) to sell Oak Lodge, Richmond, bear all the halmarks of the process undertaken with respect to Entally a decade ago.
This is the second occasion when the National Trust has tried to sell the Oak Lodge property. The last time was when Miss Horsfall was still alive and the public outcry forced a backdown. This time the Government, through their Board, apparently believe they have a better chance.
What the Richmond community want is for Oak Lodge to come under the control of a communicative, cooperative body so that there is certainty into the future without the prospect of having to expend energy, that would be better used elsewhere, to save the property from sale every few years.
John Biggs
January 27, 2013 at 11:00
“the National Trust in Tasmania is effectively a Government business…”
I am very disturbed at the implications of this — that the Trust can sell properties. I thought the whole idea of the Trust is to preserve and maintain projects deemed of historic and aesthetic value. This loophole must be plugged, otherwise there is no point in the idea of Heritage and preservation.
Alex Green
January 28, 2013 at 14:14
The National Trust has been unable to secure additional funding from the state government. Consequently Oak Lodge is to be sold. The community has effectively been told that if Oak Lodge is to remain as a public resource open as a museum then the community will have to buy it.
This is an outrageous proposition given that Oak Lodge was gifted to the National Trust. The consequence of a parsimonious government and a debt burdened National Trust is that the community is expected to pick up the bill. In other words, yet another failure of public policy.
Barry Chapman
January 28, 2013 at 17:51
There’s nothing “National” or worthy of being called a “Trust” about the National Trust (Tasmania) – as a creature of the Tasmanian Government, it’s current plan is to sell an historic, heritage property gifted to it ‘in trust’ for the Tasmanian community. This latest iteration of N. T. Tasmania is only interested in selling “the family silver” to reduce the Tasmanian Government’s already minimal expenditure in this area. Heritage tourism in Tasmania? You’ve got to be joking!
William Boeder
January 28, 2013 at 21:48
When I read articles of this order of staggering magnitude my mind swiftly recalls all those multi-millions of dollars past and present that are flick-passed or gifted to Forestry Tasmania, thus to enable them to continue their wildlife destructive ‘clear-fell logging and conversion programs.
Yes, so selling off this State’s Historical Treasures must be another example of this State’s ‘World’s Best Practices.’
Apparently this sort of self indulgent gorging upon our State’s historical treasures is par for the course and held dear to the hearts of our State government ministers, (along with those ‘Abetz led woeful opposition bench occupants,) so they may continue to enjoy their high quality of life, but unfortunately it must be at the expense of yesterday’s kindly bestowed ‘now historical’ treasures that were gifted to the people of Tasmania.
The end result of gifting so much State revenue to Forestry Tasmania will be but to provide another section of incinerated and scarred ex-primeval land to show what Forestry Tasmania do to our World Renowned Ancient Forests here in Tasmania.
At the head of this carnival of negligent forest carnage there stands the slippery rich-fellows mate, Bryan (the giggler) Green, he (who we are given to understand is primarily responsible for this morally degrading Ancient Forest destroying GBE institution of Forestry Tasmania) is the man that consents to this insane destructive madness whereby it is officially authorised to continue to line the pockets of its executive directors and those others that have attached themselves to this no-account rapacious free-for-all scamming State Government Enterprise.
Come the next election I will definitely vote for a promising independent rather than either of the lesser reprehensible of the 2 major Gorging Gorgon political parties in this State.
Then again if this is to be the chosen path for our brilliant State ministers in sourcing new State revenues, how about selling off this State’s Governor’s residence, as this heritage trust-owned mix of a Palace and a Shangri-La, at its best- would be the least of this State’s historical treasures ‘to go under the hammer’ that would even bother the citizens of this State?