Minutes of a meeting of people interested in a proposal to form a multi-disciplinary ‘Heritage Institute’ for heritage practitioners and researchers.
Held: Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, Sunday, 3 March at 10.30 am.
Opening:
Amber Aranui formally opened the meeting with a karakia.
Apologies:
Peter Adds, Nicola-Kiri Smith, Arapata Hakiwai, Richard Walter, Katharine Watson, Rachael Egerton, Keita Kohere
Introductions:
Elizabeth Pishief started with asking people to introduce themselves and say briefly why they were interested in the concept.
Present:
Graeme McConchie, David Butts, Amber Aranui, Bruce McFadgen, Huhana Smith, Bruce Petry, Conal McCarthy, Ben Schrader, Karen Greig, Ailsa Cain, Pam Bain, Imelda Bargas. Te Kenehi Teira.
Interests included career development, support, linkages with heritage organisations, training and education, relationships, professional organisation for groups and standards. Elizabeth mentioned that to date there had been 48 responses from the various people who had received the proposal.
Purpose:
The purpose of the proposed organisation was discussed. It is intended to establish a bi-cultural co-governance structure, which will initially be set up as an incorporated society.
Name:
Some discussion took place before Heritage Institute was confirmed.
Website:
A website is to be developed. It was decided that www. heritageinstitute.org.nz would be appropriate and was unlikely to already be taken.
Aims:
Elizabeth Pishief: Said she wished to add two additional aims to the proposal that Rachael Egerton had suggested.
Discussion:
Huhana Smith: Need to get synergies happening. How to do it? The University [Massey?] was working on re-linking people.
Elizabeth: Heritage specialists have a way of alienating people whose heritage they are dealing with and need training in ‘heritage’. Gap between what is happening in some areas, and the professions/specialists.
Ailsa Cain: Support and to be accountable to a profession – outside of her employer – and mentoring.
Bruce McFadgen: Going to be people who want to practice but not want to be part of the Heritage Institute, Need a statutory role – Institute needs to work closely with other organisations such as HPT. Needs to be legislated.
Imelda Bargas: Questioned the scope of the proposal. Suggested too many aims; too ambitious across diverse sector. Asked how do you make immediate gains to keep people engaged?
Bruce Petry: How do we make accreditation work effectively?
Ailsa Cain: Accreditation with Environment Court. Liability and heritage advice. Protection to members.
Bruce Petry: Institute of Architects has been de-regulated due to the economic desire increase competition and avoid professional domination. It is a difficult time to introduce the idea of a heritage institute despite the community’s need for a formal body/accreditation. ICOMOS NZ sees itself as potentially fulfilling that role. Will the new institute have the mana of ICOMOS both nationally andf internationally? The statutory role of archaeology under the HPA maybe not the same issue as for other heritage professionals.
Ailsa Cain: Back-up of membership of professional body.
Karen Greig: Difference between research-based archaeologist and archaeologist working in heritage management. Range of issues is broader than just one discipline.
Bruce McFadgen: Agree need wider scope with archaeology as governed by HPT but also other values need addressing.
Karen Greig: A heritage practitioner – needs the skills, training and recognition.
Elizabeth Pishief: Archaeologists often consider themselves heritage managers.
Bruce Petry: This is an issue across many disciplines.
Bruce McFadgen: Archaeologists’ training could be improved in some areas.
Imelda Bargas: Suggested might work to look at training first – then accreditation if appropriate. Roll out first making small gains.
Elizabeth Pishief: Looking after the profession and therefore the people (public).
Karen Greig: Former Archaeological Institute – there is a critical mass necessary to cover the cost of running and roles required – It did not have enough members.
Ailsa Cain: NZPI – liability is $350
Pam Bain: New Zealand Archaeological Association is an interest and advocacy organisation while the Heritage Institute has a different role. It is a professional organisation.
Ailsa Cain: Multi-disciplinary heritage sector? Where do I get ideas from? At present I use the Maori GIS. [http://www.tekahuimanuhokai.org.nz/home]
Huhana Smith: Acknowledge Imelda’s concerns. The Maori GIS has shown you can bring many disciplines together.
Ailsa Cain: Maori GIS : in response to gaps in District Plans
Huhana Smith: Collaborative, but responding to individual needs is important.
Conference:
Elizabeth Pishief: Katharine Watson has offered to organise a multi-disciplinary conference.
Conal McCarthy: The Critical Heritage Conference will be held in Canberra next year and we could link to it maybe. [http://archanth.anu.edu.au/heritage-museum-studies/association-critical-heritage-studies]
Graeme McConchie: How relevant is ICOMOS to all disciplines? What sort of relationship will ICOMOS etc have?
Elizabeth Pishief: Separate organisations feed in. Each organisation will continue to do its own thing.
Graeme McConchie: Is this to be an association of heritage institutions?
Elizabeth Pishief: It is a new discipline of heritage practice.
Karen Greig: ICOMOS has less relevance to some disciplines – it is viewed as more for built heritage.
Te Kenehi Teira: It does not work for Maori.
Pam Bain: ICOMOS – Authorised Heritage Discourse.
Ailsa Cain: This is fusing built and land together.
Elizabeth Pishief: We need a new philosophy – bicultural heritage management. This can still have productive relationships with other organisations.
Te Kenehi Teira: What does Museums Aotearoa do? Another membership organisation like NZAA, ICOMOS, PHANZA. Why replicate?
Elizabeth Pishief: Land-based heritage is different.
Huhana Smith: This is more encompassing.
David Butts: Museums Aotearoa do heritage but heritage is very broad. Where does this organisation sit in relation to the universities? There are issues about how groups of specialists are broadening their interests and how they relate to each other. Many are expected to work beyond their professional boundaries. Some will have to stay with the universities but what we are looking for is whether something sits above all these and incorporates components and still recognise all others. Need to work slowly, have forums to talk about practice and how it is overlapping. Explore whether we have a coherent enough practice separate from other institutions.
Ailsa Cain: Council planners. There are lots of people practising outside of institutions.
Imelda Bargas: PHANZA allows a broad range of members – with varying degrees of experience. Concern about impact of accreditation in encouraging this breadth.
David Butts: If there is a coherent enough body of information, there needs to be a qualification to get recognition.
Te Kenehi Teira: Are academic bodies prepared to work together? - Maori archaeologists involve themselves with WAC (World Archaeological Congress) [http://www.worldarchaeologicalcongress.org/]
Ailsa Cain: The career website does not have heritage management just archives etc. [http://www.careers.govt.nz/jobs/culture-heritage/ ] Poor quality of skills of those coming through and big discrepancies.
Bruce Petry: Issue of training is across all sectors. Interns etc. are not being employed because of the minimum budget approach to the current procurement processes.
Ailsa Cain: See role to support each other within an institute.
Bruce Petry: The Institute of Architects has difficulty working to its full potential due to lack of buy-in by individuals & trouble agreeing on a shared vision. There is offen an issue around paying fees & often only the determined or wealthier members end up being represented.
Imelda Bargas: Would a forum be a suitable way to bring people together to start having these cross sector discussions/ interactions?
Te Kenehi Teira: Will need a national forum on a marae. Ground up — not dictated by government departments.
Bruce Petry: We want people to be part of it from the ground up & across all areas of the heritage sector – practitoners, administrators, trades/craftspeople, policy makers, legislators, educators, community groups/historical socities, professional associations and international affleiations etc..
Karen Greig: When should we engage with organisations such as NZAA etc?
David Butts: This is an important question. Need to be involved soon, but maybe need some time to have discussions first.
Ailsa Cain: It is important to show how varied heritage is. Shonagh Kenderdine has shown support for a new environmental institute. [http://www.eianz.org/]
Ben Schrader: Could we add to the website a place to show interest for a forum [and the institute.]
Elizabeth Pishief: Can we also talk about other heritage as well as land-based — how to bring in museums/ archives etc.
Te Kenehi Teira: Ratana and a trip up the Whanganui River might be an option for forum.
Te Kenehi closed the meeting.
Held: Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, Sunday, 3 March at 10.30 am.
Opening:
Amber Aranui formally opened the meeting with a karakia.
Apologies:
Peter Adds, Nicola-Kiri Smith, Arapata Hakiwai, Richard Walter, Katharine Watson, Rachael Egerton, Keita Kohere
Introductions:
Elizabeth Pishief started with asking people to introduce themselves and say briefly why they were interested in the concept.
Present:
Graeme McConchie, David Butts, Amber Aranui, Bruce McFadgen, Huhana Smith, Bruce Petry, Conal McCarthy, Ben Schrader, Karen Greig, Ailsa Cain, Pam Bain, Imelda Bargas. Te Kenehi Teira.
Interests included career development, support, linkages with heritage organisations, training and education, relationships, professional organisation for groups and standards. Elizabeth mentioned that to date there had been 48 responses from the various people who had received the proposal.
Purpose:
The purpose of the proposed organisation was discussed. It is intended to establish a bi-cultural co-governance structure, which will initially be set up as an incorporated society.
Name:
Some discussion took place before Heritage Institute was confirmed.
Website:
A website is to be developed. It was decided that www. heritageinstitute.org.nz would be appropriate and was unlikely to already be taken.
Aims:
Elizabeth Pishief: Said she wished to add two additional aims to the proposal that Rachael Egerton had suggested.
Discussion:
Huhana Smith: Need to get synergies happening. How to do it? The University [Massey?] was working on re-linking people.
Elizabeth: Heritage specialists have a way of alienating people whose heritage they are dealing with and need training in ‘heritage’. Gap between what is happening in some areas, and the professions/specialists.
Ailsa Cain: Support and to be accountable to a profession – outside of her employer – and mentoring.
Bruce McFadgen: Going to be people who want to practice but not want to be part of the Heritage Institute, Need a statutory role – Institute needs to work closely with other organisations such as HPT. Needs to be legislated.
Imelda Bargas: Questioned the scope of the proposal. Suggested too many aims; too ambitious across diverse sector. Asked how do you make immediate gains to keep people engaged?
Bruce Petry: How do we make accreditation work effectively?
Ailsa Cain: Accreditation with Environment Court. Liability and heritage advice. Protection to members.
Bruce Petry: Institute of Architects has been de-regulated due to the economic desire increase competition and avoid professional domination. It is a difficult time to introduce the idea of a heritage institute despite the community’s need for a formal body/accreditation. ICOMOS NZ sees itself as potentially fulfilling that role. Will the new institute have the mana of ICOMOS both nationally andf internationally? The statutory role of archaeology under the HPA maybe not the same issue as for other heritage professionals.
Ailsa Cain: Back-up of membership of professional body.
Karen Greig: Difference between research-based archaeologist and archaeologist working in heritage management. Range of issues is broader than just one discipline.
Bruce McFadgen: Agree need wider scope with archaeology as governed by HPT but also other values need addressing.
Karen Greig: A heritage practitioner – needs the skills, training and recognition.
Elizabeth Pishief: Archaeologists often consider themselves heritage managers.
Bruce Petry: This is an issue across many disciplines.
Bruce McFadgen: Archaeologists’ training could be improved in some areas.
- The training element was identified by the group as very important.
Imelda Bargas: Suggested might work to look at training first – then accreditation if appropriate. Roll out first making small gains.
Elizabeth Pishief: Looking after the profession and therefore the people (public).
Karen Greig: Former Archaeological Institute – there is a critical mass necessary to cover the cost of running and roles required – It did not have enough members.
Ailsa Cain: NZPI – liability is $350
- Will this organisation also be too small?
- Will people want to be members of both?
Pam Bain: New Zealand Archaeological Association is an interest and advocacy organisation while the Heritage Institute has a different role. It is a professional organisation.
Ailsa Cain: Multi-disciplinary heritage sector? Where do I get ideas from? At present I use the Maori GIS. [http://www.tekahuimanuhokai.org.nz/home]
Huhana Smith: Acknowledge Imelda’s concerns. The Maori GIS has shown you can bring many disciplines together.
Ailsa Cain: Maori GIS : in response to gaps in District Plans
Huhana Smith: Collaborative, but responding to individual needs is important.
Conference:
Elizabeth Pishief: Katharine Watson has offered to organise a multi-disciplinary conference.
Conal McCarthy: The Critical Heritage Conference will be held in Canberra next year and we could link to it maybe. [http://archanth.anu.edu.au/heritage-museum-studies/association-critical-heritage-studies]
Graeme McConchie: How relevant is ICOMOS to all disciplines? What sort of relationship will ICOMOS etc have?
Elizabeth Pishief: Separate organisations feed in. Each organisation will continue to do its own thing.
Graeme McConchie: Is this to be an association of heritage institutions?
Elizabeth Pishief: It is a new discipline of heritage practice.
Karen Greig: ICOMOS has less relevance to some disciplines – it is viewed as more for built heritage.
Te Kenehi Teira: It does not work for Maori.
Pam Bain: ICOMOS – Authorised Heritage Discourse.
Ailsa Cain: This is fusing built and land together.
Elizabeth Pishief: We need a new philosophy – bicultural heritage management. This can still have productive relationships with other organisations.
Te Kenehi Teira: What does Museums Aotearoa do? Another membership organisation like NZAA, ICOMOS, PHANZA. Why replicate?
Elizabeth Pishief: Land-based heritage is different.
Huhana Smith: This is more encompassing.
David Butts: Museums Aotearoa do heritage but heritage is very broad. Where does this organisation sit in relation to the universities? There are issues about how groups of specialists are broadening their interests and how they relate to each other. Many are expected to work beyond their professional boundaries. Some will have to stay with the universities but what we are looking for is whether something sits above all these and incorporates components and still recognise all others. Need to work slowly, have forums to talk about practice and how it is overlapping. Explore whether we have a coherent enough practice separate from other institutions.
Ailsa Cain: Council planners. There are lots of people practising outside of institutions.
Imelda Bargas: PHANZA allows a broad range of members – with varying degrees of experience. Concern about impact of accreditation in encouraging this breadth.
David Butts: If there is a coherent enough body of information, there needs to be a qualification to get recognition.
Te Kenehi Teira: Are academic bodies prepared to work together? - Maori archaeologists involve themselves with WAC (World Archaeological Congress) [http://www.worldarchaeologicalcongress.org/]
- Have not yet gone to Maori communities. If we want to be different that needs to be done. What kind of structure? A structure that allows Maori sector to work on its own – inside the institution. Make heritage practitioners think they have a partner.
- How do we get around the jealousy of other organisations sitting over the top?
- Build a network of people who want to be accountable to each other.
Ailsa Cain: The career website does not have heritage management just archives etc. [http://www.careers.govt.nz/jobs/culture-heritage/ ] Poor quality of skills of those coming through and big discrepancies.
Bruce Petry: Issue of training is across all sectors. Interns etc. are not being employed because of the minimum budget approach to the current procurement processes.
Ailsa Cain: See role to support each other within an institute.
Bruce Petry: The Institute of Architects has difficulty working to its full potential due to lack of buy-in by individuals & trouble agreeing on a shared vision. There is offen an issue around paying fees & often only the determined or wealthier members end up being represented.
Imelda Bargas: Would a forum be a suitable way to bring people together to start having these cross sector discussions/ interactions?
- Forum could be the start of Institute — some papers, some forums. Maybe field trip.
Te Kenehi Teira: Will need a national forum on a marae. Ground up — not dictated by government departments.
- Outcome: Forum on marae to discuss issues.
- Aim: Hope everyone will be respectful of differences.
Bruce Petry: We want people to be part of it from the ground up & across all areas of the heritage sector – practitoners, administrators, trades/craftspeople, policy makers, legislators, educators, community groups/historical socities, professional associations and international affleiations etc..
Karen Greig: When should we engage with organisations such as NZAA etc?
David Butts: This is an important question. Need to be involved soon, but maybe need some time to have discussions first.
Ailsa Cain: It is important to show how varied heritage is. Shonagh Kenderdine has shown support for a new environmental institute. [http://www.eianz.org/]
Ben Schrader: Could we add to the website a place to show interest for a forum [and the institute.]
Elizabeth Pishief: Can we also talk about other heritage as well as land-based — how to bring in museums/ archives etc.
Te Kenehi Teira: Ratana and a trip up the Whanganui River might be an option for forum.
- Discussions about how pay? User pays? Maybe sponsorship? Funding from sources e.g. lotteries or national services.
- Should we start with an incorporated society? Yes.
- Need 15 people and appropriate rules.
- Meeting at Te Papa 3 May 2013 at 5pm.
Te Kenehi closed the meeting.
RSS Feed