Explainer: State Library Victoria duty of care review timeline

Following the release of documentation from the State Library Victoria (SLV) regarding ways of working with stakeholders including contractors, Books+Publishing has compiled a timeline of relevant events.

Bootcamp postponement

In February 2024, the SLV cancelled Teen Writing Bootcamp workshops that were set to be run by Alison Evans, Jinghua Qian, Ariel Ries and Omar Sakr. These workshops had been part of SLV programming for years.

The four writers set to teach the 2024 workshops were told their sessions were ‘postponed’, one day before Sakr’s first engagement with the students was due. The writers were sent termination of contract notices from the library.

The library’s cited reasonings given to the writers were ‘a duty of care to ensure the highest levels of child and cultural safety are in place’.

At the time, Sakr asked the library to clarify what it meant by ‘child and cultural safety’, reported the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH).

Sakr asked: ‘Who was unsafe? What does it mean? You have to clearly articulate if you decided on your own that your processes are insufficient, that you are unsafe. You can say that out loud. But I won’t allow the inference to remain that we are unsafe. I’ve made it very clear to them politely and professionally that it’s too serious for me to accept their premise and walk on, even with payment.’

B+P could not find any direct response or clarification to Sakr from SLV on these comments at the time.

Library staff, literary community response; subsequent SLV statements

Library staff reported to the Age that not long after the writers were notified, library CEO Paul Duldig told a meeting it was Sakr’s social media posts about Israel’s war on Gaza that ‘prompted the postponement’. Later reporting from the Age stated that a library source said to the masthead that ‘when challenged about his looking at Sakr’s public commentary, Duldig allegedly responded: “You call it profiling, I call it risk management.”‘

The Age later reported (in July) that the initial conversation about the workshops appeared to have been raised by an unnamed teacher who described Sakr as ‘unsafe’.

In March, the then–head of audience engagement for the library, Angharad Wynne-Jones, resigned in a decision ‘directly related to postponement of the events,’ according to sources who spoke with the Age. Wynne-Jones and the library made no comment on this at the time.

In response to the library’s decision about the bootcamp, the Age reported that over 100 SLV staff members wrote to Duldig to express their ‘anger at the postponement, […] claiming the events were scrapped because of the pro-Palestinian views held by the writers hosting them’.

Evans, Qian, Ries and Sakr sent their own open letter – dated 13 March 2024 – to Duldig, the SLV board, and Minister for Creative Industries Colin Brooks. In part, the open letter read: ‘In the termination of agreement contract, SLV claimed that “due to circumstances that were not apparent at the time of entering the contract, the library has decided not to proceed with the program”. What are these circumstances? The program has been run many times before, and so, once again, the implication is that the problem lies with the contracted writers.’ The authors added: ‘We consider this defamatory and damaging.’ Over 900 writers since added their names to the letter.

In April, authors Michelle de Kretser, Tony Birch and Grace Yee also refused work with the library because of the postponement of the workshops. Yee withdrew from an event promoting SLV fellowships, while de Kretser turned down a writing commission, and Birch stated at the time that he declined further work from the library, according to the Age.

In May, the library responded to the conversation, stating that there were ‘inaccuracies in media and online reporting’ about the postponements of the workshops. It released a statement claiming that it had not cancelled the bootcamps but had deferred the program ‘to allow for [a] duty of care review to take place’.

‘The postponement of the Teen Writing Bootcamp was not because of the political views or identity of anyone involved with the program,’ claimed the SLV. ‘It was because the library considered it critical to undertake the duty of care review to ensure it has in place robust policies and procedures that will enable the successful and safe delivery of the program (and other programs conducted by the library).’

Later in the statement, the organisation added: ‘The library has responded to all correspondence regarding the postponement of the Teen Writing Bootcamp, setting out the reasons for the postponement of the program and reiterating the library’s commitment to holding the program in the second half of the year, following completion of the duty of care review.’

At the time of writing, Books+Publishing could not find any information about subsequent rescheduling of the bootcamps, with the most recent information about the program on the SLV website still dated from 2023.

However, in July, media reported on SLV documents released through the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. The Age reported these documents included library staff and board members (including former federal Labor MP Maxine McKew) discussing ‘the writers’ views on issues ranging from Palestine to human rights in China’, and a summary of the writers’ social media posts and public articles, which were prepared by a library staff member.

In response to media reports on these documents, the library responded in July to ‘correct media inaccuracies’ – including the statement that the ‘postponement of the Teen Writing Bootcamp was not because of the political views or religious background of anyone involved with the program’.

‘Concerns were raised with the library about the blogs of one writer, Mr Sakr, and these blogs were not found to require further action,’ said the SLV. ‘In reviewing those concerns, the library did however find that its policies and procedures were not sufficiently robust, and therefore decided to undertake a program-wide duty of care review.’

Ries wrote about these conversations on X – sharing screenshots of emails between McKew and Duldig that were made available through the FOI request. A screenshot of an email from McKew to Duldig included the following: ‘It doesn’t mean we have to vet everyone for their political and social views. But it does mean that on a subject such as Gaza/Israel we have to be absolutely thorough and super careful about the way language is used by the people we engage. We need to be alert to what’s said and what’s not said.’

Duty of care review, recommendations and consultations

The library’s Duty of Care Review Report was completed between May and June 2024 by independent consultants Helen Conway and Tony Grybowski and Associates and made public in July 2024.

The report outlined 10 recommendations for the library, which were:

1. Finalise the Freedom of Expression and Respectful Conduct schedule as a legally enforceable requirement for inclusion in external contractor agreements
2. Obtain (legal and/or governing state department) advice to clarify the status of contractors in relation to compliance with the Victorian Public Service Code of Conduct
3. Ensure all relevant library policies include specific reference to the wording of the Victorian Public Service Code of Conduct Making Public Comment policy
4. Develop an introduction resource guide to support staff understanding of the key requirements as public servants and working at the library, the range of obligations of duty of care and with links to relevant detailed policies
5. Undertake a review of policies with the objective to consolidate under content groupings, ensure consistency and reduce duplication, and in turn enhance their accessibility
6. Collate and refine definitions into a glossary to enhance common understanding of library policies and procedure
7. Create policy management guidelines and provide to all responsible officers
8. Develop a welcome and induction guide for contractors that outlines the expectations and requirements of working with and for the library
9. Make a curatorial statement available for external stakeholders to support engagement negotiations
10. Review guidelines for parental consent and participant guidelines and ensure systems are able to facilitate obligations.

In an August 2024 media release, the library stated it would adopt all the recommendations. ‘The highest priority will be to implement those recommendations that will support our restarting the Teen Writing Bootcamp,’ said the library. ‘The library has listened carefully to feedback and will continue to engage with the creative sector, staff and other subject matter experts during the implementation process.’

Creative professionals were invited to meet with SLV to discuss the recommendations that would be undertaken by the library. Attendee Jess Walton wrote about the meeting on X, as reported by Independent Australia.

Walton stated that in the meeting were SLV director for people and partnerships Cath Brown and SLV director of experience Joel McGuinness along with independent consultant Helen Conway.

‘I am not going to identify the other authors and creatives at the meeting, but I have been talking to some of them since that afternoon about what was an incredibly infuriating discussion,’ added Walton.

In their reflection on the meeting, Walton highlighted the emphasis the library placed on a distinction between working ‘with’ and working ‘for’ SLV.

Walton said: ‘Contractors (caterers, etc.) work for the library, but apparently Teen Writing Bootcamp’s contracted authors’ work is of the library, as in, staff at the library could do this work instead of us, so we may be deemed or perceived to be of the library.’

Ultimately this decision would lead to contractors such as the authors to sign the code of conduct reserved for public service staff, Walton added.

New SLV documentation

Recently, the library has released statements and tools related to the recommendations made in the report including:

• A ‘Ways of Working Commitment’
• A ‘Freedom of Expression and Respectful Conduct Schedule’
• A curatorial statement.

In a statement titled ‘Ways of Working’, the SLV wrote on the intention of these documents: ‘This suite of tools articulates clear ways of working, outlines the library’s commitment to freedom of expression and respectful conduct and provides an overview of some of the library’s curatorial principles. These tools are living documents that evolve with our programs and services.’

The Australian Society of Authors recently shared the news about the release of these documents with its audience, contextualising the news with the broader comment: ‘Over the last year, we have heard from creators concerned about the contractual terms they have been asked to agree to for one-off engagements with a range of literary organisations.’

Category: Features