Tourism Moree has been given another six months of Council funding after two failed votes briefly left its future without a clear pathway days before its existing agreement was due to expire.
Moree Plains Shire councillors were not being asked to simply renew Tourism Moree’s funding at the June 18 meeting.
They were being asked to support a major change: bringing local tourism services under Council control, setting new performance measures, and giving the General Manager authority to begin the move.
The proposed six-month changeover would have affected almost every part of Tourism Moree’s work, including staff, volunteers, budgets, records, marketing, assets and day-to-day operations.
Under the Council model, tourism would sit inside Council’s Economic Development team. The report said a separate Tourism Manager role would no longer be needed.
Before voting began, Tourism Moree representatives addressed the chamber against the proposal.
Felicity Taylor, who told the meeting she had served on the board for three years as treasurer and secretary, questioned the lack of supporting evidence.
“What I struggle with is that only one future model has been presented and the rationale for change remains unclear,” Ms Taylor said.
“The report refers to a more efficient, flexible, and outcomes focused approach under council delivery. No evidence is provided of this.”
Council first moved into committee of the whole to discuss the report before any motion was put.
Then came the vote.
A motion to bring Tourism Moree into Council operations over no more than six months was lost.
For a moment, that might have looked like Tourism Moree’s independent model had survived.
It had not.
The defeat of the transition motion did not renew Tourism Moree’s funding agreement, retain it as the shire’s principal tourism organisation, or settle what would happen after June 30.
Cr Kelly James then moved a foreshadowed motion, seconded by Cr Brooke Sauer, to retain Tourism Moree as the principal tourism organisation for Moree Plains Shire and not proceed with the transition at that time.
Cr James also called for stronger governance, clearer accountability, reporting requirements and performance measures while maintaining Tourism Moree’s independent, industry-led structure.
“What evidence demonstrates that Tourism Moree back under the management and control of council will deliver better tourism outcomes, increased visitation, better value for ratepayers than the current or the improved independent model?” Cr James asked.
That motion was lost too.
Council had rejected the motion to bring Tourism Moree in-house. It had also rejected the motion that would have clearly kept Tourism Moree independent.
That left Council with a problem: Tourism Moree’s funding agreement was due to expire on June 30.
After a short break, councillors returned to the item to find a way through.
“We cannot have a situation where once again this results in there being a vote that doesn’t deliver an outcome,” Cr Pearse told the chamber.
“We need to get to an outcome.”
Councillors then returned to committee of the whole to reconsider the Tourism Moree item and find a path forward.
Only then did Council reach a compromise.
The final decision gave Tourism Moree another six months of funding, from July 1 to December 31, 2026, at $285,000 plus GST.
It also signalled Council still intended to move Tourism Moree into Council operations, but directed the Acting General Manager to work with Tourism Moree, bring back another report in September, and provide a return-on-investment analysis Council had previously requested in December 2024.
Money was a major part of the debate.
The Council report said bringing tourism in-house would reduce duplicated costs by using Council’s existing finance, governance, legal, procurement, records, communications and administration systems.
For Cr Cassells, the issue was also about value for money.
“At the end of the day, a lot of it is about finances, $570,000,” Cr Cassells said.
“Some of those KPIs have not been met and we’re not getting the value for money.”
For Tourism Moree manager Julie Rushby, the KPI criticism came as a surprise.
“The KPIs were set by Council and adopted by the councillors in December 2024, so they had an opportunity to change or create stronger KPIs if they deemed appropriate,” Ms Rushby said.
“Our KPI report went up, I believe, in April this year and it was passed, from memory, without question.
“If they’re saying our KPIs have not been met, there’s been no advice to us that that is the case.”
Ms Rushby said Tourism Moree knew its funding agreement was ending and expected some form of change, but did not know the report would recommend moving tourism services into Council until the agenda paper became public.
“Until we read that paper, we had no idea what the goal was,” she said.
She said the independent model allowed Tourism Moree to move quickly and support operators and community groups in ways that may be harder inside Council.
“As a more private entity, you have the flexibility to be more agile,” Ms Rushby said.
“We don’t have to wait for a Council meeting.”
Ms Rushby said Tourism Moree’s work included support residents may not see, including helping promote local events, printing game programs for rugby league and rugby union home games, supporting community groups, and working with individuals to develop tourism products.
She also said performance discussions needed to consider the effect of COVID and the closure or disruption of major visitor attractions during the funding agreement period.
“We’ve come out of COVID into a space without our major attractions operating,” she said.
For now, Tourism Moree has funding until December 31.
Its long-term independence remains unresolved.
