Reimagine

The liquidation of the Geospatial Council of Australia (GCA) has left a gap at the national level. State associations will continue their important roles — particularly for surveyors, who are regulated under state titling laws and hold statutory responsibilities that cannot be replaced nationally. But the question remains: how do we rebuild a national voice for surveyors, mappers, and the broader geospatial sector?

---

Possible Options

1. Rebuild the GCA as a true national body
   • Structure: A peak organisation representing both individual members and companies.
   • Strengths: Can combine professional expertise with industry capacity. Would allow continuity for programs like certification, awards, and national advocacy.
   • Risks: Past experience shows that mixing company and individual membership is complex, as the interests of employers and employees may diverge. Without careful governance and financial control, the risk of becoming “too corporate” resurfaces.
2. Rebuild a national body for individuals only
   • Structure: An association similar to Engineers Australia, focused exclusively on professional individuals (surveyors, mappers, GIS analysts, hydrographers, etc.).
   • Strengths: Simplifies governance and accountability. Direct focus on member services, professional development, training, and ethics. Easier to manage conflicts of interest.
   • Risks: Would need a separate channel for companies and industry suppliers. Risks losing corporate sponsorships or institutional partnerships unless clear partnership models are built.
3. Work through another national body
   • Options include affiliating with an existing professional body such as Engineers Australia (for engineers surveyors) or Surveyors Australia
   • Strengths: Builds on established governance, finances, and reputation. Provides national-level advocacy without the burden of running a new company.
   • Risks: The unique identity of geospatial professionals may be diluted. Surveyors and mappers risk becoming a “sub-discipline” within a larger organisation rather than having their own strong voice.
4. Form a Federation of State Associations
   • Structure: Each state-based surveying or spatial body retains autonomy but comes together under a federated national council for selected purposes (policy, migration, international representation, education, awards).
   • Strengths: Recognises that statutory authority and professional recognition for surveyors exist at the state level and cannot be replaced nationally. A federation ensures national advocacy where needed but leaves professional regulation local.
   • Risks: Coordination could be slow and fragmented. Differences between state associations (size, resources, governance) may create imbalance in influence.

---

Lessons Learnt from GCA

• Too big, too corporate does not work
  • Twelve staff, high salaries, and board remuneration created unsustainable financial pressure. A leaner structure is essential.
• Mixing companies with individuals is complex
  • Governance becomes conflicted when companies seek commercial outcomes while individual professionals need advocacy, recognition, and career services.
• State representation is essential
  • Surveyors have statutory and professional responsibilities tied to state laws (e.g. titling, licensing). These functions cannot be transferred to a national body. State-based representation must be respected and maintained.
• A national body is still needed
  • Some issues demand a national voice:
    • Migration policy and skills assessments.
    • Nationally recognised professions like hydrographic surveying.
    • Sector-wide training, standards, and universities.
    • International representation (e.g. FIG, ISO, cross-border recognition).
• Other lessons?
  • The national body must be transparent, member-focused, and financially sustainable.
  • Governance should be lean and inclusive, avoiding a corporate culture that alienates members.
  • Programs like the Geospatial Excellence Awards and Locate conference show the value of national coordination and should be preserved in some form.

---

Open Questions for Members

• Which model do you think is most realistic: rebuild GCA, individuals-only, federation, or affiliation with another body?
• How do we ensure state surveyor representation remains strong while still coordinating nationally?
• What services should a new national structure prioritise — certification, CPD, migration, awards, international representation?
• Should companies be involved in governance, or only in sponsorship/partnership roles?
• How do we build a financially sustainable body that avoids the mistakes of the past?
• What lessons from the GCA story do you think we still haven’t addressed?
• What else do we need for a stronger, fairer national voice?

---

Please leave us your ideas or comments here

All posts and comments are reviewed before publication. Your name and contact details are optional.