Motat pulled in two directions

Not everyone is on board with Motat's increasing focus on entertainment. Photo / Supplied

The personalities at the heart of Motat's power struggle find common ground on one thing: they want what's best for Motat. But each maintains the other is doing great harm to the museum at a vital time in its evolution.

It's true of Ian Hambly, who chairs the Motat Society and whose elevation to a seat on the board has sparked a High Court challenge. It's true of Alan Curtis, the veteran volunteer and former board member who is taking Hambly to court and who alleges all sorts of wrongdoing by Hambly and the society executive.

The same goes for Motat's executive director (or CEO) Jeremy Hubbard, locked in a dispute with Hambly for 19 months over his conduct as road transport collection manager. Hambly doesn't have many nice things to say about Hubbard's managerial skills, nor those of his management team.

Ten years after regional funding improved Motat's financial security, the wrangling threatens to undermine its steady progress just as it falls into the clutches of a Council Controlled Organisation - a corporate-focused agency of the single Auckland council.

That may explain the extraordinary turnaround at Wednesday's October board meeting, which began with a deadlocked attempt to elect a new chairman and continued with Hambly hinting at the stirrer role he could play in the year ahead. But nearly five hours later - the last three behind closed doors - the board emerged from its longest meeting with a new chairman and deputy and an apparent unity of purpose to resolve the issues.

"It's not going to change anything tomorrow," new chairman Paul Bayly said afterwards, "but we've started that process around how to engage constructively."

Hambly's board appointment by the society was at the expense of board chairman Peter Drummond and is being challenged by Curtis in the High Court. Under the Motat Act, the society, which controlled Motat in its formative years, appoints four board members and six local bodies.

Bayly says it's unusual to have the society chairman on the board [though it was routine until recently] and it brings the potential for conflict. "But it also represents an opportunity for us to build a relationship."

It may prove better to have Hambly inside the tent, representing at least some of the volunteers who are the lifeblood of Motat, than sniping from outside. But first there's a lot of baggage to shed: the High Court case, Hambly's attempt to bring a personal grievance case over his treatment and the society's case before the Employment Relations Authority over whether collection managers who are paid an honorarium have the status of employees.

Much is at stake. Motat has the potential to become a world-class visitor attraction but it will always rely on volunteers to make the most of its heritage collections, which have just been valued at over $22 million.

Under the new Regional Facilities CCO, Motat will face considerable scrutiny in a fiercely competitive environment. While visitor numbers are at record levels and income is up, funds are still needed to complete a $13 million aviation hall and additional improvements. A carpark and entrance is on hold; there are long-term plans to build exhibition halls allowing collections to be better displayed. The boardroom upheavals have set back preparation of Motat's draft annual plan.

Hambly is a relative newbie among the volunteers, some of whom go back to Motat's founding. The former traffic officer-turned-businessman first approached Motat while organising a reunion in 1999 and asked to borrow a patrol car. "I enjoyed cleaning the car up so much I became a volunteer."

After the Motat Act was passed placing the museum on a secure financial footing, he wrote a proposal to develop the road transport collection. Since 2007 he has chaired the Motat Society. He has grown strongly critical of Motat's direction and management - concerns shared within some, though not all, of Motat's 12 volunteer sections.

He is now painted as a destructive force by opponents, including Curtis. The turning point in his relationship with management appears to have come when he used the whistleblower provisions of the Protective Disclosures Act to lay a complaint with the Auditor General's Office. Management attempted to discipline him over a breach of process and have since raised further allegations. But Hambly enjoys strong backing among some sections - in August, eight section heads signed a petition detailing complaints.

Like most museums, Motat must strike a balance between its curatorial focus and numbers through the gate. Healthier resourcing under regional funding has also brought increased scrutiny and accountability. Hambly and his supporters believe that under director Hubbard and his management team the pendulum has swung too far towards entertainment.

They complain of acquisitions turned down, clampdowns on restoration funding and pressure to cull collections with little regard for heritage significance or the stories the items might tell. As administration has expanded, so has the paperwork. Some volunteers - among them skilled professionals with rare expertise - complain of a lack of respect.

The volunteers have always enjoyed a degree of autonomy - section leaders propose work programmes and are given budgets to manage. Plans announced in July to install a small professional unit to oversee collections management stoked smouldering fires in some sections.

But under Hubbard, at least some of Motat's extra resources have been put to good use. Collections stacked in containers are now safely housed offsite; leaky buildings repaired and spruced up. Signage has improved and there is more logic and coherence to the visitor trail. Aircraft exposed to the elements will soon be rehoused in a grand hangar. Extending the tramline provides potential to further develop the Motat2 site.

And some sections, including the high-profile, big-budget tramways unit, firmly support what management is doing - arguing the proposed collections management changes will streamline processes.

Curtis says the society's actions in funding the ERA case are contrary to its role of supporting the museum and a waste of its limited resources. He says the case has more to do with Hambly's wish to bring a personal grievance claim than the collections management row. "I'm puzzled as to why somebody who is a volunteer collection manager wants to be an employee."

While he claims support from 30 or so volunteers, this failed to materialise at the AGM when the 74 present overwhelmingly endorsed Hambly and his executive.

Curtis's statement of claim alleges bias and wrongdoing by Hambly and three members of the executive committee - Lyndsay Whittle, Andre Pointon and Bill Rayner - over the board appointments process. It claims Hambly, Whittle (who heads the bus section) and Pointon's father Ken (the steam section head) have a financial interest in the outcome of the ERA case.

Hubbard stresses Curtis is acting as an individual but a supporting affidavit by Colin North, the board secretary and the society's treasurer, has added to Hambly's sense of grievance. He complained at Wednesday's board meeting that confidential allegations concerning his dispute were now publicly accessible.

Hambly says the main reason for going to the ERA is the planned new collection management structure and Hubbard's insistence that collection managers are volunteers. He says the plan could fundamentally change the nature of Motat, with collection managers and volunteers being pushed around.

Yet despite the deep rifts the protagonists still remain on first name terms. Such is the enduring nature of Motat.

Motat Society

* Formed as incorporated society before Motat opened in 1964.

* Became statutory body under 2000 Motat Act, which introduced regional funding.

* Charged with supporting the museum to meet its objectives.

* Appoints four of Motat's 10-member board of directors.