![[ ]
Yet Rudd’s current proposals lag behind
the changes being proposed for the ALP’s
sister party in Britain by its Opposition
Leader, Ed Miliband.
Miliband’s reforms would see non-party
members voting in pre-selections and
would end the guaranteed vote
percentage allocated to unions in party
ballots, currently in Australia this
amounts to 50 per cent of the votes at
state conferences.
Miliband, like Rudd, believes the reforms
are required to reconnect with the
party’s (changing) electoral base and to
re-invigorate the party’s membership.
During the 1990s union membership
declined dramatically in Australia and ALP
membership declined even faster, with
hundreds of local
branches across
the country
shutting up shop.
The problem for
the ALP is that
these changes
have
concentrated
power in the
hands of a few
dozen union officials and factional
heavies.
Put bluntly a party created in the 1890s
by unions, controlled by unions and for
the benefit of unions is just not relevant
to vast sections of the modern Australian
electorate.
Recent savage defeats in NSW and
Queensland, and the prospect of a defeat
federally, make the problem more urgent
than ever before.
During the past 50 years, the ALP has
comeback from electoral defeats before
by grafting an appealing leadership on
top of an anachronistic organisational
structure.
From Whitlam and Hawke to Dunstan,
Wran, Carr and Beattie, the ALP was
blessed with several generations of real
leadership talent.
That sort of talent, in those quantities,
now seems a distant dream.
The ALP’s pre-selection processes are just
not working anymore, they favour
officials from affiliated unions, political
advisers and party officials to the
exclusion of just about everyone else.
The ALP’s great leaders in the past few
decades have all had broader life
experience and an ability to connect with
people outside the unions-party bubble.
Paul Keating used to say that the best
political training was asking ordinary
branch members for a vote.
That’s how you used to learn how voters
think and what really motivates them.
Not anymore, most candidates are now
selected through complex factional deals,
often with help from the party’s state
and national executives.
Prime Minister Rudd has long been the
party’s outsider candidate.
Rudd has no deep factional or union
connections or backing.
Rudd’s claim to leadership has always
been centred on his popularity in the
broader electorate.
A successful outsider candidate for party
leadership is a novelty in Australia.
But for Democrat presidential candidates
in the USA, it has become the rule than
the exception.
Carter, Clinton and Obama, the last three
Democrat presidents, all ran against the
party establishment and won.
They could do so because of the USA’s
primary system, where ordinary voters
have a say in choosing the party’s
candidates.
Reflecting their popularity, primaries
have expanded in the USA to become
more inclusive over time,
Many US states are now moving to ‘open’
primaries where voters can participate in
the selection of candidates even if they
are not registered as supporters of that
party.
It may be that part of Rudd’s electoral
popularity is the sense many voters seem
to have that he is not beholden to unions
and factions.
Many voters seem to have a sense that
Rudd is their candidate, torn down in
June 2010 by the boys from old labour.
In Australia, primaries offer the ALP a
chance to engage with a changed
electorate.
Up to the 1970s, the Australian
workforce was predominantly unionised,
blue-collar and male.
Even the typical union member these
days is a female, university-educated
professional working in the community
services sector.
What’s more the
ALP has to appeal
to a large number
of young people
who don’t
understand
unions and don’t
find them
appealing.
Many of the
people who were
once attracted to the party of Whitlam
now vote for the Greens.
And today’s blue-collar worker is likely to
be self-employed tradie with concerns
about business conditions and small
business regulation.
The ALP’s problem today is similar to that
which faced Menzies in the 1940s.
Menzies created the modern Liberal
Party by reaching out beyond warring big
business factions to a whole raft of
middle class community-based
organisations.
Famously, he used the term ‘the
forgotten people’ to characterise this re-
building and re-connecting exercise.
The ALP needs a leader that can do a
Menzies and reconnect the labor party
with its own forgotten people.
Rudd would like to be that leader.
If Rudd fails, the ALP will have to find
someone else to re-create the ALP as a
modern centre-left party.
The ALP’s pre-selection processes are just not working
anymore, they favour officials from affiliated unions,
political advisers and party officials to the exclusion of
just about everyone else.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/35b422c9-8988-4b4d-b1c5-6b3686e11425-161108001920/85/The_Shell_Issue2-8-320.jpg)
![In late August last year, Sydney radio
broadcaster Alan Jones told listeners:
“[Prime Minister Julia Gillard] said that
we know societies only reach their full
potential if women are politically
participating. Women are destroying the
joint – Christine Nixon in Melbourne,
Clover Moore here. Honestly”.
It was the spark that ignited the highest-
profile case in Australia of what is
referred to (often pejoratively) as
clicktivism or slacktivism: where activists
can participate in social movements
through their laptops or smartphones.
Within hours of Jones’ remarks, Sydney
social commentator, Jane Caro, created
the Twitter hashtag #destroythejoint and
the Twitter-verse was ablaze with angry
condemnations of Jones’ remarks.
Soon after, University of Technology
Sydney (UTS) lecturer, Jenna Price
created the Destroy The Joint Facebook
community page. Within months its
membership had swelled to 20,000
helped along by the Sunday Telegraph’s
report of Jones’ now notorious 23
September speech at a Sydney University
Liberal Club function in which he said the
then PM’s recently deceased father had
likely died of shame. (Jones later
apologised).
The Destroy the Joint social media
campaign was instrumental in applying
public pressure – through threat of
boycott – on companies advertising on
Jones’ 2GB breakfast program to
withdraw their ads.
Dozens did, including Mercedes Benz,
Woolworths, Freedom Furniture, Coles,
Bing Lee and Mazda.
An online petition at change.org calling
on 2GB to sack Jones attracted more than
115,000 supporters.
On 7 October, 2GB owner, the Macquarie
Radio Network, suspended all advertising
on the show to protect its advertisers
from pressure being applied by the
#destroythejoint campaign, which
Macquarie’s Chairman, Russell Tate,
slammed as “cyber bullying”.
Macquarie Radio estimated the boycott
cost the station between $1 million and
$1.5 million. Most advertisers returned to
the program within weeks.
In the lead up to and during the
controversy Jones’ program enjoyed an
increase in ratings of 0.5 per cent to 17.3
per cent. This fell away to 15.4 per cent
by February 2013. By late May Jones
audience share was back at 17 per cent,
pretty much where it was before the
controversy erupted, dropping to 15.8
per cent last month.
The #destroythejoint movement is an
interesting study in the effectiveness of
on-line activism.
Slacktivist sceptic, Evgeny Morozov
argues “‘Slacktivism’ is an apt term to
describe feel-good online activism that
has zero political or social impact. It gives
those who participate in ‘slacktivist’
campaigns an illusion of having a
meaningful impact on the world without
demanding anything more than joining a
Facebook group”.
In the case of #destroythejoint, Caro,
Price and their many thousands of
supporters did have an effect. But was it
long-term?
True, there was a short-term drop off in
revenue for 2GB and Jones’ ratings fell in
the months following but have now
recovered.
What is certain, #destroythejoint put
advertisers on notice that their brand and
bottom line can be damaged if they
associate themselves with remarks that
offend a significant and easily mobilised
proportion of the population.
Broadcasters and more importantly their
masters will be more focussed on
avoiding content which, while not in
breach of any regulatory framework,
offends public sensibilities. This probably
would not have occurred 10 years ago.
Fans of on-line activism have been
criticised for over eulogising its impact.
Beyond #destroythejoint clicktivism is
seen most starkly in Australian political
life through organisations such as
GetUp!, inspired by the United States’
MoveOn.org and the global Avaaz.org.
Communications professional, James
Norman, who works for the Australian
Conservation Foundation, recalled a
recent email from GetUp! which
proclaimed: ''We did it! The ABC and SBS
are safe, for now'.
GetUp! claimed newspaper
advertisements it ran stopped plans by
the Federal Coalition to privatise the ABC
and SBS after a motion to that effect was
placed on the agenda at a Liberal Party
Victoria State Conference.
As Norman wrote in the Sydney Morning
Herald: “The only problem was that
“[Opposition Leader] Tony Abbott had
already ruled out the policy a week
before”.
Norman questions the effectiveness of
clicktivism, describing it as “activism
bound to news cycles, data gathering and
emotive taglines - far removed from the
urgency and camaraderie of traditional
protest movements”.
“By embracing tried and tested methods
of delivery of marketing, this kind of
activism can have the effect of merely
stroking people's desire to ‘do the right
thing’, rather than engaging them in
meaningful political struggle,” Norman
argues.
“Slacktivism’ is an apt term
to describe feel-good online
activism that has zero
political or social impact. It
gives those who participate
in ‘slacktivist’ campaigns an
illusion of having a
meaningful impact on the
world without demanding
anything more than joining a
Facebook group”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/35b422c9-8988-4b4d-b1c5-6b3686e11425-161108001920/85/The_Shell_Issue2-11-320.jpg)
![Promises Blowin’ In The Wind
Benjamin Haslem
A common reaction from people when
told about plans to build 200 giant wind
turbines on King Island off north-west
Tasmania is: “What will happen to the
cheese?”
That says a lot about people’s
perceptions of the wind-swept island,
home to the world-famous King Island
Dairy.
Think of King Island and images of brie
and clotted cream spring to mind.
Friesian cows grazing on green grass,
watered by clouds delivered across
thousands of miles of pristine ocean.
It’s this image and the island’s location
at the bottom of the world that is being
used by developers to market two
luxury golf courses planned for King
Island.
Courses that will tap into a growing
global golf-tourism market, dominated
by cashed-up retirees and empty-
nesters hungry to experience links-golf
on exotic and rugged dunes courses.
What the developers had not counted
on was this image being tarnished by
200 wind turbines towering more than
150 metres into the air at blade tip,
dotted across nearly 20 per cent of King
Island’s 1100 square km.
Last November, the State Government-
owned Hydro Tasmania announced it
wanted to conduct a feasibility study
into the construction of a wind farm on
King Island, which it branded TasWind.
All the electricity generated by TasWind
will be transmitted via a yet-to-be-built
undersea cable to Victoria.
Hydro Tasmania was big on community
consultation, promising:
“It’s important to know what the King
Island community thinks about the
concept because Hydro Tasmania will
not proceed with the project if it does
not have their support”.
The utilities giant promised a
community survey (or vote) to see if
King Islanders were happy to proceed to
a feasibility study into the project.
The TasWind website, set up by Hydro
Tasmania, promised:
“We believe 60 per cent support for the
project moving to the feasibility stage
is a very fair measure. We continue to
work with the community on the best
way to measure support and have
proposed an independent survey of all
island residents.” [Emphasis added]
If locals agreed to feasibility, that would
not necessarily lead to construction,
with Hydro Tasmania promising further
testing of community support before
erecting the first turbine. Interestingly,
there was no promise of another survey.
For many locals, TasWind promised a
lifeline for King Island’s economy,
reeling at the closure of the local
abattoir in September 2012, which costs
70 jobs.
Artist’s impression](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/35b422c9-8988-4b4d-b1c5-6b3686e11425-161108001920/85/The_Shell_Issue2-13-320.jpg)
The_Shell_Issue2
- 1. THE I S S U E 2 August 2013 for NSW Budget slow & steady UNAA YP Young Professionals grow A Reformed ALP? Abbott’s first 100 days Clickivist Promises blowin’ in the wind Turkey – a country at the crossroads The rise of human- computer interaction The brutal world of TV is no place for a man John Mangos The value of brand From crisis to HERO and back again Why do PR? Election timing Antony Green year
- 2. Wells Haslem: One year on John Wells, Chairman Wells Haslem is now one year old… a wonderful milestone. And we are celebrating with the second edition of The Shell, the official publication of Wells Haslem Strategic Public Affairs. We want to bring you regular updates on issues, public affairs activity, trends in the industry, and insights into client work across our portfolio of activity. The Shell brings a contemporary look and feel to the Wells Haslem brand and is underpinned by more than twenty years’ experience in the public affairs industry. First year of business Wells Haslem Strategic Public Affairs’ first year in operation has been a very successful one. We have grown our client base, improved revenue and cut costs. The year has been marked by some interesting and often difficult projects. Wind farms, submarines, superannuation, construction, religion, education, consumer products and many others have all been part of a varied and interesting first year in business. One of our most recent projects involved defending the beauty, tourism and farming on King Island being overshadowed by 200 giant wind turbines… taking up 20% of the island. While the proponents, Hydro Tasmania, will conduct a feasibility study into the project, it’s no certainty to proceed. It has some way to travel yet. Our team combines decades of experience in public affairs, government relations, issues management, journalism, politics, policy advice, and foreign affairs. It is made up of John Wells, Benjamin Haslem, Alexandra Mayhew, Kerry Sibraa AO, Julie Sibraa, Trevor Cook, and Michael Baume. Indeed they were a key part of the old firm Jackson Wells – on and off, over a 21-year history. Wells Haslem is not just another PR company. What we really try to do is quickly add value to our clients’ projects. This is something we have always been renowned for. At the centre of our firm is the desire to help clients communicate better and to resolve issues affecting how they communicate. Our work covers all key disciplines of communication: strategy development, issues management, government relations, media relations, crisis management, digital media and FMCG promotion. If you think we can help you, or you want to know more about our services, please ring Ben, Alexandra or me on +61 (0)2 9033 8667, or visit our website wellshaslem.com.au. John Wells Chairman
- 3. Julie Sibraa Slow & SteadyFinding new ways to fund infrastructure NSW Budget Infastructure NSW Budget The recent NSW State Government Budget, handed down by arguably the world’s nicest Treasurer, Mike Baird, was described by some in the media as “boring”. Mike Baird’s response was to say that boring was the new sexy. And for those in the infrastructure sector it was a pretty racy budget.
- 4. it did so on the promise of turning around the flagging state economy which included a significant infrastructure backlog and no ready source of funds to address it. Short termism, vested interest, fear of debt and an aversion to risk acquired following intense media and public criticism of privately financed projects like the Cross City and Lane Cove Tunnels left the State with a number of much needed public infrastructure projects sitting on the shelf. And thanks to the increasing cost of building material and wages and the complexity of retrofitting infrastructure to an already heavily built Sydney environment, the projects were getting more expensive every year. Although Labor Premier Morris Iemma understood that the lack of investment in productivity enhancing infrastructure over the previous decade was a long- term problem for both the residents of the State coping with congestion and the economy’s ongoing competitiveness, his attempts to find a way to fund new infrastructure ultimately resulted in his political demise. The sale of the State’s electricity sector, which had the potential to generate around $15 billion, challenged one of the Labor Party’s great shibboleths – the notion of the necessity of government ownership and operation of a range of utilities and functions. The O’Farrell Government has no such constraints – apart from ones of its own And whilst not overflowing with new infrastructure spending commitments, the Budget included funding and delivery details for a range of major transport projects including the $8.3 billion North West Rail Link – a single deck metro-style train line linking the North West Growth Centre just beyond Rouse Hill to Chatswood, the South West Rail link (an initiative of the previous Government), the Northern Sydney Freight Corridor program and two light rail projects. But the centrepiece of the infrastructure budget was the announcement around the long awaited WestConnex - a monster of a road project in scale, complexity and cost (estimated at around $10-13 billion) that incorporates the completion and widening of the M4 motorway, duplication of the M5 east motorway and a link between them to include Sydney Airport and Port Botany. The sheer cost and scale of the 33 km WestConnex project has presented a major funding challenge to Government. The most straightforward part of the project – the duplication of the M5 east – on its own would have required a substantial up-front financial contribution from Government even if it were procured as a public private partnership (PPP) with tolling. This is despite the fact traffic revenues are largely known, unlike previous greenfield road projects such as the tunnels mentioned earlier. The cost of the project simply cannot be covered by toll revenue. The Budget allocated $1.8 billion over four years (in addition to Commonwealth commitments) to get the project started, but more importantly, the Government indicated how the project would be financed. This is the first indication as to how NSW some much needed infrastructure projects. The 2013/14 Budget continues this process with the proposed lease of the Port of Newcastle – currently the world’s largest coal export terminal – expected to raise between $700 million to $1 billion, in addition to the continuation of savings measures aimed at reducing the Government’s operating expenses over the forward estimates, thereby creating room in the balance sheet to take on additional debt. hen the O’Farrell Govern- ment was elected in NSW in 2011 on W political choosing - and the 2013/14 budget has continued to make solid and innovative headway towards funding much needed infrastructure at the same time as keeping the budget with in credit rating agency imposed caps. Making inroads into the backlog will not happen quickly, particularly given the challenges outlined above and the long lead times associated with major construction projects. But given the size of the O’Farrell Government’s parliamentary majority and the likelihood of them being in Government for three terms, a period of 12 years, they have a unique opportunity to actually see through the delivery of The sheer cost and scale of WestConnex has presented a major funding challenge to Government. “ “ pg.4|NSWBudget–JulieSibraa
- 5. Treasury’s new Infrastructure Financing Unit (IFU), tasked with “enhancing the State’s financing capabilities for PPPs and other infrastructure funding models,” has been working since it was established following last year’s budget. A financing strategy has been designed to “minimise impact on the State’s balance sheet, encourage maximum involvement of the superannuation sector and provide the State the capacity to recycle its investment to new projects”. Drawing from the San Francisco Bay Area Transit Authority, the Government will fund the first stage of the project, but will do so as an equity investment rather than a capital grant. It will then leverage the value of the tolls to attract private funding for the next part of the project. Government is effectively taking the risk for the traffic forecasting which will make it a more attractive investment for private equity. The business case and financing model will be tested with the private sector. Make no mistake, the WestConnex project on its own is colossal, not only in terms of cost and scale, but because it presents a major political challenge which will use a great deal of the O’Farrell Government’s political capital. The degree of risk and difficulty is extremely high as the Government, or its delivery agency, will have to manage the complexity and major inconvenience the construction will generate on well- mobilised inner-west local communities not known for their tolerance in regard to such matters. However, as is often said in politics these days when a government is doing something relatively unpopular “it’s the right thing to do”. Some have claimed this new approach represents the end of the PPP, so reviled in recent years, but really it’s just the fact that the projects sitting on the shelf for so many years have simply gotten too big for even the most optimistic traffic forecasts and the post-GFC financial sector simply won’t take on the risk. Government understanding of PPPs and where they can best be applied to bring forward projects has also matured substantially since the days of the Sydney Airport Rail Line and Cross City Tunnel. The availability model PPP still offers enormous benefits for bringing forward infrastructure and the Government is using this model for the new Sydney Convention centre and the Northern Beaches Hospital which will also be operated by the private sector. So while the progress on addressing NSW’s huge infrastructure backlog may not appear to be splashy or spectacular, many other governments would have baulked at the scale of the challenge. Julie Sibraa is Wells Haslem’s Special Counsel. She was Senior Adviser, Infrastructure, to the Hon Morris Iemma, Premier of NSW in 2008 and National Manager, Policy, at Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, 2009-11
- 6. Since its inception in October 2011, the United Nations Association of Australia (UNAA) Young Professionals (YP) has achieved some excellent results, albeit with some teething pains. The UNAA YP involves young professionals throughout Australia in the work of the United Nations and raises funds for its sister organisations and their vital initiatives. While there have been set-backs and hurdles - such as venues reneging support last minute and sourcing on-going partnerships - there are definitely benefits to being a young organisation. There are no bad habits to inherit. There is a vibrant, energetic team. And there is an untapped audience the UNAA YP gets to make a stellar first impression with. The NSW Leadership Team - made up of dedicated volunteers who work across various sectors including law, recruitment, sustainability, finance, and public relations - has worked hard to bring events to life that have educated our counterparts about the work of the United Nations. The UNAA YP has addressed global issues at a local level to keep topics engaging, relatable, and ultimately empowering our audiences into action. The program has been so successful the UNAA YP has expanded into the ACT, with that Chapter launching next month. The Queensland Chapter is next to be established. Engaging young professionals has proven to be a delicate balancing act. The reason the program has been so successful is because the UNAA YP is run by young professionals for young professionals. So if an idea does not interest the Leadership Team, the Team knows it will not appeal to a wider audience. This year, the Leadership Team has strategically designed events to cover important issues, such as violence against women, refugees, and human rights, while sourcing speakers that have genuinely interested young professionals. While people may attend to show their support or interest in a cause, a major motivator to attend is the opportunity to meet like-minded people. A poor choice of venue or (lack of) alcohol can prove to be a deal-breaker with young professionals. A great value-add to YP events has been inspiring speakers’ willingness to stay late into the evening talking with guests. It’s been the YP Leadership Team’s smart event planning that has achieved the right balance and seen every UNAA YP event sell out. Another tool the Leadership Team understands well is social media. Facebook has proven to be invaluable, not only for event information, but for the ability to allow guests to see photos soon after the event, which they share – therefore spreading the UNAA YP brand and messages even further. As a result of rolling out a more strategic social media approach, the number of UNAA YP Facebook followers has quadrupled in the last six months alone. 2013 has seen the Leadership Team build on the UNAA YP’s work of 2012, with more events undertaken and planned. The UNAA YP provide people the opportunity to attend formal events, informal monthly drinks with the Leadership Team, fun and unusual bespoke events, and partnered events. The Leadership Team is continuously refining this formula to make the UN more interesting and appealing to a wider audience. We’ve already undertaken our planning day for 2014, and it’s going to be a big year. A bigger team. More members. Extra events… All to achieve our ultimate, idealistic Gen Y vision: Every young professional in Australia understands the role the UN plays in our worldwide community. 2013 Events | February: International Women’s Day: Violence Against Women… What GenY Don’t Tweet About (Proceeds: UN Women) | March: UNAA YP Trivia | June: World Refugee Day: Headlines, Deadlines, On the Immigration Frontline (Proceeds: UNHCR) | August: World Humanitarian Day | September: UN General Assembly Leaders’ Week & International Day of Peace: with the Australian Institution of International Affairs: Public Debate | October: World Food Day: UNAA YP Gala Dinner (Proceeds: World Food Programme) | November: UNAA YP End of Year Celebration | Monthly: Meet-ups with the UNAA YP Leadership Team Alexandra Mayhew is the UNAA Young Professionals NSW Vice Convenor INVOLVE ENGAGE INSPIRE The next UNAA YP event on World Humanitarian Day, Monday 19th August. Tickets: facebook.com/UNAA.YPN Association of Australia I N S P I R E S a n d E X P A N D S 2013 UNAA YP Speakers: NSW Minister for Family and Community Services and Minister for Women, The Hon. Pru Goward MP | Leading columnist with The Daily Telegraph and Herald Sun, Miranda Devine |Renowned journalist and author, Gretel Killeen | Cultural Architect and leading Expert in Cultural change and impact, Brett Murray | Lifestyle writer and Project Futures campaigner, ‘Ms Darlinghurt’, Alex Adams | Associate producer at SBS Insight and refugee, Saber Baluch | Refugee Campaign Coordinator at Amnesty International Australia, Graeme McGregor | Journalist and producer of SBS series ‘Go back to where you came from’, Ronan Sharkey | Former UN spokesman for Sri Lanka and successful author, Gordon Weiss
- 7. A REFORMED Dr Cook was Chief of Staff to Federal Employment, Education and Training Minister, John Dawkins from 1987-90. Last year he completed a doctoral thesis UNIONS AND THE ALP – Between dependence and independence at the University of Sydney A REPORT BY WELLS HASLEM DIGITAL COUNSEL, DR TREVOR COOK Newly reinstalled as Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd has party reform as one of his top priorities. So far he has announced measures to clean up the tainted NSW Branch and to give branch members a say in electing the federal parliamentary leader. Giving branch members 50 per cent of the vote in leadership contests will greatly reduce the power of a handful of senior union officials and factional leaders in the caucus. It is the biggest change in 50 years, since Whitlam, and probably the biggest change since federation when a national ALP was first put together from various state branches. pg.7|AreformedALP?–TrevorCook
- 8. [ ] Yet Rudd’s current proposals lag behind the changes being proposed for the ALP’s sister party in Britain by its Opposition Leader, Ed Miliband. Miliband’s reforms would see non-party members voting in pre-selections and would end the guaranteed vote percentage allocated to unions in party ballots, currently in Australia this amounts to 50 per cent of the votes at state conferences. Miliband, like Rudd, believes the reforms are required to reconnect with the party’s (changing) electoral base and to re-invigorate the party’s membership. During the 1990s union membership declined dramatically in Australia and ALP membership declined even faster, with hundreds of local branches across the country shutting up shop. The problem for the ALP is that these changes have concentrated power in the hands of a few dozen union officials and factional heavies. Put bluntly a party created in the 1890s by unions, controlled by unions and for the benefit of unions is just not relevant to vast sections of the modern Australian electorate. Recent savage defeats in NSW and Queensland, and the prospect of a defeat federally, make the problem more urgent than ever before. During the past 50 years, the ALP has comeback from electoral defeats before by grafting an appealing leadership on top of an anachronistic organisational structure. From Whitlam and Hawke to Dunstan, Wran, Carr and Beattie, the ALP was blessed with several generations of real leadership talent. That sort of talent, in those quantities, now seems a distant dream. The ALP’s pre-selection processes are just not working anymore, they favour officials from affiliated unions, political advisers and party officials to the exclusion of just about everyone else. The ALP’s great leaders in the past few decades have all had broader life experience and an ability to connect with people outside the unions-party bubble. Paul Keating used to say that the best political training was asking ordinary branch members for a vote. That’s how you used to learn how voters think and what really motivates them. Not anymore, most candidates are now selected through complex factional deals, often with help from the party’s state and national executives. Prime Minister Rudd has long been the party’s outsider candidate. Rudd has no deep factional or union connections or backing. Rudd’s claim to leadership has always been centred on his popularity in the broader electorate. A successful outsider candidate for party leadership is a novelty in Australia. But for Democrat presidential candidates in the USA, it has become the rule than the exception. Carter, Clinton and Obama, the last three Democrat presidents, all ran against the party establishment and won. They could do so because of the USA’s primary system, where ordinary voters have a say in choosing the party’s candidates. Reflecting their popularity, primaries have expanded in the USA to become more inclusive over time, Many US states are now moving to ‘open’ primaries where voters can participate in the selection of candidates even if they are not registered as supporters of that party. It may be that part of Rudd’s electoral popularity is the sense many voters seem to have that he is not beholden to unions and factions. Many voters seem to have a sense that Rudd is their candidate, torn down in June 2010 by the boys from old labour. In Australia, primaries offer the ALP a chance to engage with a changed electorate. Up to the 1970s, the Australian workforce was predominantly unionised, blue-collar and male. Even the typical union member these days is a female, university-educated professional working in the community services sector. What’s more the ALP has to appeal to a large number of young people who don’t understand unions and don’t find them appealing. Many of the people who were once attracted to the party of Whitlam now vote for the Greens. And today’s blue-collar worker is likely to be self-employed tradie with concerns about business conditions and small business regulation. The ALP’s problem today is similar to that which faced Menzies in the 1940s. Menzies created the modern Liberal Party by reaching out beyond warring big business factions to a whole raft of middle class community-based organisations. Famously, he used the term ‘the forgotten people’ to characterise this re- building and re-connecting exercise. The ALP needs a leader that can do a Menzies and reconnect the labor party with its own forgotten people. Rudd would like to be that leader. If Rudd fails, the ALP will have to find someone else to re-create the ALP as a modern centre-left party. The ALP’s pre-selection processes are just not working anymore, they favour officials from affiliated unions, political advisers and party officials to the exclusion of just about everyone else.
- 9. In Australian federal elections the electorate generally gets it right. Until very recently the Coalition Opposition, led by Tony Abbott, was clearly going to win the next election. That’s of course if the Government stuck with Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Labor was never going to do that because it did not want to be decimated at the election on September 14 - the date chosen by Ms Gillard as Election Day. Now all of that has changed. Kevin Rudd is back as Prime Minister and the latest Newspoll has Labor and the Coalition level on 50 per cent two-party preferred. So will the electorate get it right this time? That remains to be seen. If the electorate decides to endorse an Abbott led government, what will the first 100 days look like under Prime Minister Tony Abbott? If you listen to Mr Rudd, Mr Abbott and the Coalition have no policies. The Coalition has in fact developed a comprehensive suite of policies in over 50 areas. At least 55 policy announcements, including the outlining of substantive plans for a strong and prosperous economy, aim to drive productivity and to support the creation of up to one million jobs over five years. And what of the first 100 days: Tax reform will begin immediately with the removal of the carbon and mining taxes, which the Coalition says are undermining growth and investment, damaging the country’s reputation and making Australia less competitive. Mr Abbott says these taxes are driving up the cost of living. Treasury's own modelling shows the carbon tax will erode GDP with a cumulative loss of output of $32 billion by 2020, rising to a staggering $1 trillion by 2050 (in 2010 dollars). The Coalition will move swiftly to change the border protection legislation in order to stem the flow of unauthorised boat arrivals, reinstituting policies similar to those of former coalition Prime Minister John Howard. The Coalition has only recently unveiled what they say is the most ambitious deregulation agenda seen in this country, including the streamlining of environmental approval processes to provide greater investment certainty as well as a commitment to restore the Australian Building and Construction Commission to tackle union abuses in the building industry. There will also be a substantive commitment on critical infrastructure spending and reform, including the development of a rolling 15-year national infrastructure plan. A full-scale commission of audit we will be conducted, the first since 1996, and will identify areas of waste and other poor quality Government spending and will be fundamental to restoring the structural integrity of the budget. All these policy positions will, in one form or another, start in Abbott’s first 100 days if the Coalition is elected. In outlining his policy agenda, and his likely first 100 days, Mr Abbott has continued to weather a relentless attack on the basis he has no policies. What Mr Abbott has to continue to do is go out and educate the electorate that his policies are better than those that have put the country into the position he says it is in – lacking in confidence, a substantial reduction in retail spending, rising unemployment, and rising costs. What Mr Rudd will attempt to do is recast himself and his policies in order to demonstrate that he is a new leader with a new agenda. And while the polls have now narrowed substantially, the Coalition retains a slight advantage. The outcome of the often looks like a beauty contest but in the end it will come down to policies… Who is offering what the people want?
- 10. Clicktivist Will the next major societal upheaval be sparked by a hash tag? Benjamin Haslem reports A number of recent on-line grassroots community campaigns, here and abroad, have brought the issue of clicktivism into the spotlight. But how effective are web-based campaigns at delivering real change? Are they all heat and light with nothing to show once the # has been consigned to yesterday’s Twitter trends? Or could the US Civil Rights movement been Tweeted? pg.10|Clicktivist–BenjaminHaslem
- 11. In late August last year, Sydney radio broadcaster Alan Jones told listeners: “[Prime Minister Julia Gillard] said that we know societies only reach their full potential if women are politically participating. Women are destroying the joint – Christine Nixon in Melbourne, Clover Moore here. Honestly”. It was the spark that ignited the highest- profile case in Australia of what is referred to (often pejoratively) as clicktivism or slacktivism: where activists can participate in social movements through their laptops or smartphones. Within hours of Jones’ remarks, Sydney social commentator, Jane Caro, created the Twitter hashtag #destroythejoint and the Twitter-verse was ablaze with angry condemnations of Jones’ remarks. Soon after, University of Technology Sydney (UTS) lecturer, Jenna Price created the Destroy The Joint Facebook community page. Within months its membership had swelled to 20,000 helped along by the Sunday Telegraph’s report of Jones’ now notorious 23 September speech at a Sydney University Liberal Club function in which he said the then PM’s recently deceased father had likely died of shame. (Jones later apologised). The Destroy the Joint social media campaign was instrumental in applying public pressure – through threat of boycott – on companies advertising on Jones’ 2GB breakfast program to withdraw their ads. Dozens did, including Mercedes Benz, Woolworths, Freedom Furniture, Coles, Bing Lee and Mazda. An online petition at change.org calling on 2GB to sack Jones attracted more than 115,000 supporters. On 7 October, 2GB owner, the Macquarie Radio Network, suspended all advertising on the show to protect its advertisers from pressure being applied by the #destroythejoint campaign, which Macquarie’s Chairman, Russell Tate, slammed as “cyber bullying”. Macquarie Radio estimated the boycott cost the station between $1 million and $1.5 million. Most advertisers returned to the program within weeks. In the lead up to and during the controversy Jones’ program enjoyed an increase in ratings of 0.5 per cent to 17.3 per cent. This fell away to 15.4 per cent by February 2013. By late May Jones audience share was back at 17 per cent, pretty much where it was before the controversy erupted, dropping to 15.8 per cent last month. The #destroythejoint movement is an interesting study in the effectiveness of on-line activism. Slacktivist sceptic, Evgeny Morozov argues “‘Slacktivism’ is an apt term to describe feel-good online activism that has zero political or social impact. It gives those who participate in ‘slacktivist’ campaigns an illusion of having a meaningful impact on the world without demanding anything more than joining a Facebook group”. In the case of #destroythejoint, Caro, Price and their many thousands of supporters did have an effect. But was it long-term? True, there was a short-term drop off in revenue for 2GB and Jones’ ratings fell in the months following but have now recovered. What is certain, #destroythejoint put advertisers on notice that their brand and bottom line can be damaged if they associate themselves with remarks that offend a significant and easily mobilised proportion of the population. Broadcasters and more importantly their masters will be more focussed on avoiding content which, while not in breach of any regulatory framework, offends public sensibilities. This probably would not have occurred 10 years ago. Fans of on-line activism have been criticised for over eulogising its impact. Beyond #destroythejoint clicktivism is seen most starkly in Australian political life through organisations such as GetUp!, inspired by the United States’ MoveOn.org and the global Avaaz.org. Communications professional, James Norman, who works for the Australian Conservation Foundation, recalled a recent email from GetUp! which proclaimed: ''We did it! The ABC and SBS are safe, for now'. GetUp! claimed newspaper advertisements it ran stopped plans by the Federal Coalition to privatise the ABC and SBS after a motion to that effect was placed on the agenda at a Liberal Party Victoria State Conference. As Norman wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald: “The only problem was that “[Opposition Leader] Tony Abbott had already ruled out the policy a week before”. Norman questions the effectiveness of clicktivism, describing it as “activism bound to news cycles, data gathering and emotive taglines - far removed from the urgency and camaraderie of traditional protest movements”. “By embracing tried and tested methods of delivery of marketing, this kind of activism can have the effect of merely stroking people's desire to ‘do the right thing’, rather than engaging them in meaningful political struggle,” Norman argues. “Slacktivism’ is an apt term to describe feel-good online activism that has zero political or social impact. It gives those who participate in ‘slacktivist’ campaigns an illusion of having a meaningful impact on the world without demanding anything more than joining a Facebook group”
- 12. US Author, Malcolm Gladwell (The Tipping Point; Blink), agrees, arguing the activists who spawned the great (and importantly high-risk) campaigns for social change – the US Civil Rights Movement; the collapse of the Iron Curtain – share a crucial feature: they were recruited to the struggle by a close friend. Each of these social upheavals had what Stanford sociologist Doug McAdam, called “a ‘strong-tie’ phenomenon”. “The kind of activism associated with social media isn’t like this at all,” Gladwell writes in his New Yorker piece, ‘Small Change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted’. “The platforms of social media are built around weak ties. Twitter is a way of following (or being followed by) people you may never have met. Facebook is a tool for efficiently managing your acquaintances, for keeping up with the people you would not otherwise be able to stay in touch with. That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life.” The journalist who first coined the term clicktivism, Micah White, argues a fundamental problem with clicktivism is that metrics value only what is measurable (follows, likes, re-tweets etc). “Clicktivism neglects the vital, immeasurable inner events and personal epiphanies that great social ruptures are actually made of. “The history of revolutions attests that upheaval is always improbable, unpredictable and risky. A few banal pronouncements about 'democracy in action' coupled with an online petition will not usher in social transformation.” Others disagree. Mumbai journalist, Leo Mirani, argues that Gladwell wrongly defines activism as “as sit-ins, taking direct action, and confrontations on the streets”. “However, if activism is about arousing awareness of people, changing people's minds, and influencing opinions across the world, then 'the revolution will be indeed be tweeted', 'hashtagged', and 'YouTubed',” Mirani writes in The Guardian in response to Gladwell. Cindy Leonard, from Robert Morris University’s Bayer Centre for Non-profit Management, believes there is nothing different about gathering to protest in a public square or gathering in a Facebook group to support an opinion. “If anything, the online gathering is safer, more cost effective, more environmentally friendly, and has the ability to draw more people,” Leonard writes. “In either case, the objective is getting the attention of the people who have the ability to create the desired change.” A 2010 study by Georgetown University’s Centre for Social Impact Communication - The Dynamics of Cause Engagement – is cited by defenders of slacktivism. The US national survey concludes that people who frequently engaged in promotional social activity were: § As likely as non-social media promoters to donate § Twice as likely to volunteer their time § Twice as likely to take part in events like charity walks § More than twice as likely to buy products or services from companies that supported the cause § Three times as likely to solicit donations on behalf of their cause § More than four times as likely to encourage others to sign a petition or contact political representatives If #destroythejoint teaches us anything, it is that one communication faux pas has the potential to unleash a mass campaign against your organisation, damaging your brand and those of your customers and suppliers. It may be short-lived but the damage wrought during the maelstrom can be significant. #destroythejoint#protest#volunteer pg.12|Clickivist–BenjaminHaslem
- 13. Promises Blowin’ In The Wind Benjamin Haslem A common reaction from people when told about plans to build 200 giant wind turbines on King Island off north-west Tasmania is: “What will happen to the cheese?” That says a lot about people’s perceptions of the wind-swept island, home to the world-famous King Island Dairy. Think of King Island and images of brie and clotted cream spring to mind. Friesian cows grazing on green grass, watered by clouds delivered across thousands of miles of pristine ocean. It’s this image and the island’s location at the bottom of the world that is being used by developers to market two luxury golf courses planned for King Island. Courses that will tap into a growing global golf-tourism market, dominated by cashed-up retirees and empty- nesters hungry to experience links-golf on exotic and rugged dunes courses. What the developers had not counted on was this image being tarnished by 200 wind turbines towering more than 150 metres into the air at blade tip, dotted across nearly 20 per cent of King Island’s 1100 square km. Last November, the State Government- owned Hydro Tasmania announced it wanted to conduct a feasibility study into the construction of a wind farm on King Island, which it branded TasWind. All the electricity generated by TasWind will be transmitted via a yet-to-be-built undersea cable to Victoria. Hydro Tasmania was big on community consultation, promising: “It’s important to know what the King Island community thinks about the concept because Hydro Tasmania will not proceed with the project if it does not have their support”. The utilities giant promised a community survey (or vote) to see if King Islanders were happy to proceed to a feasibility study into the project. The TasWind website, set up by Hydro Tasmania, promised: “We believe 60 per cent support for the project moving to the feasibility stage is a very fair measure. We continue to work with the community on the best way to measure support and have proposed an independent survey of all island residents.” [Emphasis added] If locals agreed to feasibility, that would not necessarily lead to construction, with Hydro Tasmania promising further testing of community support before erecting the first turbine. Interestingly, there was no promise of another survey. For many locals, TasWind promised a lifeline for King Island’s economy, reeling at the closure of the local abattoir in September 2012, which costs 70 jobs. Artist’s impression
- 14. The island had been suffering economic and population decline for years and Hydro Tasmania was promising up to $1 million a year would be paid into a community fund to pay for whatever Islanders wanted. Hydro Tasmania spruiked that the “forecast economic benefit to the community is in the order of $7m-$8.9 million a year”; up to 60 long-term full- time jobs would result. Land owners who agreed to place turbines on their properties would receive generous annual lease payments; payments would be made to neighbours. For many locals it seemed manna from heaven. But for a group of locals, many whose families had lived on the island for generations, it spelt disaster. It would ruin the Island’s unique lifestyle and some feared it could compromise their health. The fact much of the area mooted as turbine sites was on property owned by off-island superannuation funds and a large Japanese agribusiness meant most of TasWind’s money would flow off shore. Opponents, quick to emphasise they are not against renewable energy per se, rallied around and formed the No TasWind Farm Group (NTWFG) to encourage locals to vote no to a feasibility study. With the assistance of a local land owner who has family living on the island, the NTWFG engaged Wells Haslem Strategic Public Affairs to help promote a no vote. During a two-day visit to King Island and extensive discussions with locals, it became apparent to the author and the NTWFG that the only way to defeat Hydro Tasmania was to convince locals there was a bright future for the Isle without a giant wind energy factory. What was needed was a positive campaign that tapped into the pride many islanders felt for their home and for their resilience. Citing the planned golf courses and the 25,000 extra tourists they would generate each year (based on the hugely successful Barnbougle golf course development in north-east Tasmania) the NTWFG argued that King Island could position itself as major global tourism destination. It wasn’t all about golf. By leveraging its image for clean food and its relative global isolation, King Island would be home to the best restaurants and cooking schools, a magnet to bird watchers (the island is home to the rare Orange-bellied parrot and six endemic bird sub species), bush walkers, scuba divers and surfers. The NTWFG argued the wind farm would destroy King Island’s image and with it any hope of growing the Island’s economy through tourism. When locals argued they were only being asked to support a feasibility study, the NTWFG argued that would place an already fragile economy in suspended animation for more than two years. No- one would be able to sell property and at least one of the golf developers would struggle to attract investors. Wells Haslem designed pamphlets that were either posted to locals or inserted in the King Island Courier newspaper. A local car dealer donated his advertising space on the paper’s front page, where we placed a different ad each week. Wells Haslem Partner, Alexandra Mayhew, designed and administered a NTWFG website, to communicate the no vote message. Hydro Tasmania appeared rattled by the NTWFG campaign and just days before the vote promised to invest $500,000 in a new abattoir for the island. The utility provider also echoed the NTWFG message promising “we will work with local industries and community groups such as tourism, golf, accommodation, the cider brewery, abattoir, beef, dairy and the Scheelite Mine to ensure TasWind supports future development”. The magic 60 per cent support figure vanished; in the final TasWind community bulletin, Hydro Tas CEO Roy Adair wrote: “As we have said many times, this project will only proceed with the majority support of the King Island community”. (It was bolded for emphasis). On the morning of Monday 24 June Hydro Tasmania announced 58.77 per cent of voters supported going to feasibility. The NTWFG immediately called on Hydro Tasmania to abandon its plans as the magic 60 per cent figure had not been reached. A Hydro Tasmania Board meeting was brought forward two days to effectively decide whether to break its promise to King Island. At 2pm, Hydro Tasmania said 58.77 per cent was close enough and the study would proceed. Its spokesman Andrew Catchpole made the remarkable comment: “I know some have implied that the figure of 60 is a number that will determine if the project goes ahead or not, however, we have always said that 60 per cent would be a good indication of broad community support. We got 59 per cent and that is a very good result”. Asked by reporters is there would be a second survey to test support for construction, Mr Catchpole was equivocal, saying: "This is one of the things we want to talk to the community about". The NTWFG condemned the decision as a broken promise and warned Hydro Tasmania could never be trusted again. Interestingly, and ominously for Hydro Tasmania, supporters of the feasibility study expressed anger at the power utility’s actions. On a Facebook page set up to discuss the project a yes supporter wrote: “I am happy we are going ahead to find out best options, yet upset that trust is already broken. I ask that only honesty comes from Hydro instead of half-truths to keep investment we can find elsewhere”. At the time of writing the NTWFG was considering its options.
- 15. The city of Istanbul, famed for its strategic and geographic significance as the crossroad between Europe and Asia, is almost a metaphor for the precarious position the country now finds itself in. The outcome of the citizen-led protests will determine whether it will continue in its development as a modern European democracy or remain the country of its past, dominated by a single strongman. A recent and first visit to the city of Istanbul coincided with the beginning of riots inflamed by a brutal and unprovoked government response to a small and peaceful protest against plans to turn the Gezi Park on Taksim Square, one of the cities few green spaces, into a shopping complex. Since then, the protests have continued and escalated, widening in cause and spreading to other Turkish cities. The global media coverage has put Turkey and its Government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the country’s most successful politician since Ataturk, under intense scrutiny and has already led to the freezing of negotiations on its entry into the European Union. There is a lot at stake for a country seeking not only entry to the European Union (EU), but also the right to host the 2020 Olympics and Paralympics in Istanbul. From a first-time tourist point of view, Istanbul is a wondrous metropolis spread along each side of the Bospherus and Golden Horn, teeming with energy and vibrancy - not to mention tens of thousands of other tourists. While not the official capital, Istanbul is the epicentre of the nation’s history, culture, finance and business. With a growing population of around 13.5 million people, it is the largest city in Europe and the third largest city proper in the world. Remarkably it is also one of the world’s safest cities. It has much to recommend it. Demographically speaking, Turkey is a young country with 43 per cent of its 80 million population under the age of 25 and 14.1 per cent over 55, compared to 31 per cent of Australia’s 23 million under 25 and 26.2 per cent over 55. The median age is 29.2 compared to Australia’s 38.1 ro s uTacountryatthe C s rkey By Special Counsel | | Julie Sibraa | | s road
- 16. “...Turkey had one of the fastest growing and most diverse economies in Europe, comprised of services, agriculture, manufacturing, shipbuilding, construction, and electronics. Turkey has had one of the fastest growing and most diverse economies in Europe, comprised of services, agriculture, manufacturing - including the production of motor vehicles for just about every company you could think of - shipbuilding, construction, and electronics. Its strategic geographical position links the oil and gas rich nations bordering the Caspian Sea to Western Europe and the Middle East via the world’s second longest pipeline. Reforms undertaken in the 80s largely transformed the economy from a statist model to a more free market one. Many previously Government-owned enterprises have been privatised. Tourism is a major and growing source of income, estimated at around $23 billion and as such, becoming increasingly important to the financing of the country’s current account deficit. Twenty seven per cent of all visitors to Turkey visit Istanbul, which in April this year was voted Europe’s best destination. At the same time the city’s tourist officials announced a 23.8 per cent increase in tourism numbers for the same quarter last year, with a total of 10 million visitors expected for the year. The 2013 MasterCard Global Destination Cities Index survey found that Istanbul was the sixth most visited city in the world, and with 9.5 per cent growth, one of the fastest growing cities in terms of visitor numbers. The report states that if all top 10 destination cities maintain their current rates of growth in the next few years, then by 2016 Istanbul will surpass Singapore, New York and Paris in terms of international visitor arrivals. What these facts and figures demonstrate is what should be a very bright future for Turkey and its beating heart, Istanbul. Its accession to the EU would complete a process begun after the First World War when Mustafa Kemel Ataturk inherited an empire in collapse and defeat and took some extraordinary steps to drag his nation into the 20th century as a modern secular state. Turkey has been trying to gain acceptance into the EU for 26 years. Talks on its potential membership had been stalled for three years and were supposed to resume in early July, but following the Prime Minister’s heavy- handed response to the protests and aggressive reaction to criticism from the international media and other nations, Germany (and the Netherlands) voted to block further negotiations for the time being. Germany is Turkey’s biggest export and second biggest import trading partner, and largest source of tourist numbers. Its President, Angela Merkel, faces her own election this year on 22 September and has already demonstrated she won’t be inclined to take a soft stand on Prime Minister Erdogan’s intransigence towards his citizens. While Turkey would easily meet many of the EU’s economic and social requirements for membership, it must also demonstrate respect for civil rights, freedom of the press and other democratic values. Based on recent events, it will fail. In terms of its Olympic aspirations and the recent riots in Brazil (due to host the 2016 Olympics) it may also fail. Despite the seemingly large groundswell of citizens turning against him, Prime Minister Erdogan is undoubtedly a popular politician and one of the modern nation’s most successful. He has never lost an election and in each of his last three elections for Prime Minister he increased his vote. In 2011 he received close to 50 per cent of the popular vote giving him a considerable mandate to enact his campaign promises. Throughout his political career he has challenged the boundaries of the secular state. In his early political days he was a key member of the Islamist Welfare Party which was outlawed by the constitutional court as a threat to the nation’s secular laws and he was subsequently jailed and banned from politics for inciting religious hatred. His election promises, including the curbing of the availability of alcohol recently pushed through the Parliament, have divided the country, and led many to speculate on the future of the secular state. His recent utterances in response to the riots have been troubling and strongly suggest a return to former less democratic times. The role of the military, which has historically acted as the guardian of secularism but largely sidelined under Erdogan, is yet to be seen. Turkey therefore stands at a crossroad with feet on either side of the past and the future. Whether the Prime Minister will heed the call of citizens wanting more transparency democracy and free speech or continue the drive towards an Islamist state is yet to be determined, but there is much to lose. pg.16|Turkey–JulieSibraa
- 17. TECH. BRAND OPPORTUNITIES INTHE RISEOFHUMAN- COMPUTER INTERACTION THE PAST DECADE HASSEEN AN EVOLUTION IN THE PR REALM We have witnessed the shortening of the news cycle from 24 hours to instant, the rise of instant messaging – sometimes to millions of people, and the headaches this has created for the ever important brand controller – and the ultimate decline (to near death) of the printed publication, just to name a few. The technological innovations of the naughties have left some catching their breath, and others – who have embraced it - striding forward. Digital media, social media, and new media platforms – like tablets and smart phones - have changed the PR world indefinitely. And we’re in for another big shift. The desktop model has peaked. Fewer people line up around the block for the latest Apple release. Apps aren’t news anymore. Consumers are becoming bored with new laptop and tablet releases. People are not reading physical newspapers anymore, they are heading online via laptops and smartphones - and even that will become redundant. Into the future people will not be reaching for laptops but products many have confined to the world of sci-fi. THE NEXT TECHNOLOGICAL REVOLUTION IS COMING. BRANDS THAT STAY AHEAD OF THE CURVE WILL BENEFIT.
- 18. C O N N E C T E D C A M E R A S Cameras are everywhere. In hotels, staring up from the palm of a hand (in the smartphone) and recently, in shop mannequins. A shopper admiring an outfit on a mannequin will be unaware that mannequin will be starring right back. Algorithms will match faces to databases and soon the mannequin will be asking the shopper, by name, if they want to try on that new outfit in that brand they love, and yes, they have it in the right size. Brands will need to utilise this recognition delicately, as to not encroach on people’s privacy, while offering personalised services. W E A R I N G D E V I C E S By the time Google Glasses become a relic of the 10s and voice commands become commonplace, people will be comfortable, and consider it normal, to be covered in inconspicuous devices. These cameras, sensors, and displays will respond to the wearer’s will via gesture, touch and voice. They will feed back information to the wearer via displays and whispers. A good reputation will be vital for brands, as shoppers will simply point to a product on the shelf and ask, is that brand ethical? Here are some of the technological innovations that will change the face of brands into the future. V E R Y S M A R T S P E C S Eventually replacing smart phones will be space-age spectacles. They will interact with the internet through voice commands. Google Glasses, for example, will let users message friends, read maps, and take photos. Brands’ involvements with smartphones have been mixed, many being unsure of how to utilise the space effectively. Having an ‘app friendly’ website will not suffice. Brands will need to abandon the box, innovate and create something users will genuinely find useful in this fresh and different medium. V O I C E C O M M A N D S The next few years will see natural language commands become commonplace. Instead of punching letters into a desktop, tablet, or phone, people will simply speak aloud and computers, integrated into houses, cars, and workplaces, will respond, sending off messages, accessing house appliances, readying the car. Opportunities here for brands will be diverse; however with the time between decision making and action becoming instantaneous, those brands that can ingeniously tap into their consumers at the right time of day or experience will be rewarded with impulse purchases. D R I V E R L E S S C A R S Google’s Sergey Brin claimed that by 2017 “Google’s self-driving cars will be available for everyone.” As cars become ever more automated they are getting smarter and more self-sufficient. Occupants will be left without a road to concentrate on. This presents a prime opportunity for brands to reach an audience seeking to fill their time. Abandon the billboard and start thinking along the lines of in-flight entertainment. S T R A T E G I S E , I N N O V A T E A N D S U C C E E D These innovations will come to fruition, in this decade or the next, and will form the foundation stones of another technological evolution. They will present branding challenges, but more excitingly, huge opportunities. Those who seek out innovations can ‘own’ the spaces. Importantly, while the contact methods may once again revolutionise, strategic thinking should remain. Companies should avoid getting caught up in ‘getting on the platform’ and instead optimise new platforms to complement their broader strategies. pg.18|Tech–AlexandraMayhew
- 19. I recently did a double act with Lisa Wilkinson at a fundraiser and the conversation turned to how women over the age of 40, and even 50 for that matter, are now dominating the television airwaves. Ten years ago such women were doomed. According to former 60 Minutes executive producer John Westacott they had lost the "f ... ability factor". So I posed the obvious question to the vivacious, and over-50, star of morning television: "What about blokes like me over 50?" "You're stuffed," came the humorous reply, which amused the 600 women in the room - and myself. As true as it is, in retrospect I found the answer not to be so funny. In recent times we've seen Ten's Bill Woods and Ron Wilson get the chop. Leigh Hatcher has left Sky News, as has Terry Willesee, and the very capable Chris Roe was let go last week after nine years of dedicated service. Even as recently as last week we saw the highly competent Melissa Doyle reportedly take a $150,000 haircut from a $700,000-a-year salary. Our airwaves are now dominated by the highly intelligent and attractive types of Leigh Sales, Liz Hayes, Lisa Wilkinson, Jennifer Keyte, Kylie Gillies, Natalie Barr, Juanita Phillips, Sandra Sully, Tracy Grimshaw, Jenny Brockie, Ellen Fanning, Helen Dalley, Chris Bath, Samantha Armytage and Today Tonight's Helen Kapalos. What's going on? In the US and Europe media organisations would be beating a path to the doors of us 50-something blokes with generations of experience, grey hair, worldliness and wisdom. Such men are revered. Not here it seems. Has television misogyny done a backflip? In the words of the immortal Professor Julius Sumner Miller: "Why is this so?" Thirty-four years ago, when I began in broadcast news, the ratio was about eight men to two women on the road - the anchors were all men. It now seems the opposite. Newsrooms attract far more female journalists. Young male graduates appear to be gravitating to higher pressure, shorter lifespan occupations like investment banking. The late, great Brian Naylor of GTV Nine News (who died in the Kinglake bushfires) used to say to me that good news anchors were like old slippers - the scruffier and older we got the more the demographic loved us. Brian Henderson was living proof of this. He could have read the phone book in the end and people would've tuned in, they loved him so much. Same for James Dibble, Roger Climpson and Eric Walters. Walter Cronkite anchored CBS news until he was 66, a year after the mandatory retirement age of 65 at that network. Dan Rather retired, aged 75, after 44 years on the same network. Tom Brokaw retired from the NBC anchor's job at age 64, and is still actively on the network. ABC's top-rating Peter Jennings was struck down by cancer aged 67, but was still going strong and had at least another 10 years in him. THERE'S NO DOUBT THE CURRENT CROP OF FEMALE PRESENTERS ARE PROBABLY THE BEST WE'VE EVER HAD, BUT WHAT'S WRONG WITH US BLOKES? Are we too experienced, too grey or, more likely, too expensive? (Let's face it; few of us ever passed the Westacott "f ... ability" test). My dear friend and mentor, thespian Stuart Wagstaff, read the news for Seven in the '60s. His advice was always that warmth was key. They must want to mother you or f ... you", he continues to say at age 88. If he is right, ipso facto, we blokes have gone cold. Could that be it? I don't think so. Our years wearing out shoe leather, working the phone, catching planes at short notice, giving blood for our foreign bureaus 24/7 simply just don't count anymore. Instead the lure of the "dark art" of public relations, not so much for the big bucks but for a living, has begun to magnetise males in journalism. Hence this from Claire Wolfe and Dr Barbara Mitra of the UK's Worcester University last year when they wrote a thesis called "Newsreaders as Eye Candy". I quote from their conclusion: "There is still discrimination against older women in the industry. The lack of women with grey hair, compared with men, is worrying as it supports the trend that women are not allowed to age, but have to remain young and physically attractive. "The pressure on female newsreaders to look physically attractive and young is part of the wider patriarchal power structures that dominate our society, as well as media organisations. We wonder, therefore, whether we will ever see a woman with grey hair reading the news." Of course, at the University of Worcester they would refer to us Australians as "antipodeans", ie "from a point on the Earth's surface which is diametrically opposed to it". Obviously they would be correct on two counts: geographically, and from the perspective of a freelance (read unemployed) news anchor who admits to tinting his grey hair. John Mangos is a veteran TV presenter who has worked for Seven, Nine, Ten and Sky News. @johnmangos THE BRUTAL WORLD OF TV IS NO PLACE FOR A MAN By JOHN MANGOS
- 20. PR is considered by some as frills and not a necessary arm of a business. This has been quite evident in the past few years as companies faced slimmer margins in Australia’s slowing economy, with consumer trepidation affecting sectors from FMCGs to property. BrandZ, the world's largest brand equity database, released its Top 100 most valuable global brands 2013 in May, and valued the 100 brands at $2.6 trillion. With Google increasing 5% in brand value, while Apple only increasing 1%, reputation is vital to survival in this highly competitive marketplace. Public relations practitioners work to not only promote brands, but to protect them. PRs are the first line of defence on messaging, not only what a company is saying, but how it is saying it. What is quietly threaded through every company in the BrandZ Report is an effective public relations component. Not one of the top ten brands, or any listed in the report, would be included if the brands were not both promoted and continually protected. Even the most gifted PR practitioner cannot stop all issues arising, but they can often circumvent crises, minimising brand damage. This is a result of firstly skills in a crisis, but also ongoing stakeholder relationship building. If an unwise executive cuts PR from the budget, stakeholder relationships will suffer, and eventually so will the brand. THE TOP TEN MOST VALUABLE GLOBAL BRANDS 2013* Apple | 1 Google | 2 IBM | 3 McDonald’s | 4 Coca-Cola | 5 AT&T | 6 Microsoft | 7 Marlboro | 8 Visa | 9 China Mobile | 10 *BrandZ, May 2013, Top 100 most valuable global brands 2013 The VALUE of BRAND PROTECTION By Alexandra Mayhew pg.20|Brandprotection–AlexandraMayhew
- 21. arely has a crisis with the potential to seriously damage a brand unfolded so rapidly, in front of so many people, and been dealt with so proactively and expeditiously. And rarely has all that fine work unravelled so spectacularly a few days later. It was early in the final quarter of the Australian Football League match between the country’s most popular club side, Collingwood and the reigning premiers, Sydney. The evening of Friday 24 May. The opening match of the AFL’s much lauded Indigenous Round, which celebrates the contribution of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders to Australia’s most popular winter sport. The game was played at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in front of 65,306 spectators; the national TV audience was 1.06 million. The game had added potency. It marked 20 years since an incident at Collingwood’s old suburban ground, Victoria Park, celebrated as the watershed moment when racism in the AFL was exposed in all its ugliness. In 1993, at the conclusion of a match at Victoria Park, Indigenous St Kilda player Nicky Winmar turned to the Collingwood cheer-squad, lifted his jumper and pointed at his skin. A number among the Collingwood faithful had earlier taunted him with racist comments about petrol sniffing. A photograph of Winmar staring down the ’pies fans is an iconic image in the history of Australian sport (see next page), and featured heavily in media reports ahead of the 24 May clash. It was against this historic backdrop that a teenage girl, sitting in the front row of the MCG’s Southern Stand, shouted at Sydney star and Indigenous player, Adam Goodes, who was no more than 10 metres away. Goodes immediately pointed at the girl and asked security guards to remove her from the ground. TV cameras showed a clearly distressed Goodes leaving the playing field and entering the change rooms unable to complete an historic win for the Swans, its first over Collingwood at the MCG since 2000. The girl was seen being marched to the back of the stands by officials. Twitter and Facebook were instantly ablaze with condemnation, anger and disbelief. No one knew what the girl had said but from Goodes’ reaction it was obvious. Not again. Collingwood faced a crisis. Watching on from the stands was Collingwood President and high-profile media figure, Eddie McGuire, a man credited with modernising the club. He acted swiftly, dealing with the crisis with aplomb. As soon as the game finished he rushed to the Sydney rooms, sought out Goodes and apologised. All was captured on live TV. McGuire then held a press conference, condemning the girl’s remarks as “despicable”. “Everyone knows the rules at Collingwood: if you racially vilify anybody, it's zero tolerance; you're out,” McGuire said. . R FROMCRISIS TO HERO ANDBACKAGAIN How Eddie McGuire delivered a million TV viewers a lesson in crisis management only to blow it all a few days later. By Benjamin Haslem* *Benjamin Haslem is a member of the Collingwood Football Club.
- 22. t was a stark contrast to the club president in 1993, Allan McAlister, who was quoted as saying Aboriginal people were welcome at the club provided “they behave like white people”. McGuire’s actions were universally praised. A man widely criticised for having too much influence over sport and media – “Eddie Everywhere” – was momentarily a bit of a hero. Goodes’ was also magnanimous, accepting the 13-year-old girl’s apology (she’d called him an “ape”), emphasising she was too young to know better and was likely parroting what she had heard others, older than her, say. For PR tragics, this was the crisis management gold standard. An ugly incident had been turned to, if not a positive, than at least a vehicle to remind all of us that racism has no place in our society. Then it all went pear shaped. Five days later, McGuire suggested on his breakfast radio program that promoters of the new King Kong musical in Melbourne invite Goodes as a special guest. "You can see them doing that, can't you?,” McGuire said “Goodesy. You know, the big, not the ape thing the whole thing, I'm just saying the pumping him up and mucking around and that sort of stuff.” Collingwood and McGuire were in crisis. Again. Except this time, it was handled badly. McGuire did what you would expect anyone with a modicum of a conscience to do. He apologised to Goodes by phone and publicly. He was clearly mortified at what had passed his lips. But he ham-fistedly claimed "I wasn't racially vilifying anyone this morning ... I was thinking the exact opposite. After I realised my mistake I immediately retracted and apologised. e blamed exhaustion and a slip of the tongue. But as many pointed out tongue slips don’t involve whole sentences. He offered to step down as club president if the Board asked him to. And there lies the rub. Instead of taking responsibility for his own actions, implementing his “zero tolerance” rule and stepping down, even temporarily while his remarks were investigated by the AFL, he wrote himself a get-out-of-jail card. McGuire is an immensely powerful figure at Collingwood. Possibly the most powerful president in the Club’s history. The Board was never going to stand him down unless he told them to. And so we were left with the perception that McGuire had one set of rules for himself and one for others. He should have stood down on the spot. Before even holding his press conference to apologise for his on- air gaffe, he should have released a statement saying he would step down pending the AFL’s investigation. At the press conference he should have been knowledgeable enough to admit he had vilified Goodes and that he needed to take a long hard look into his soul to figure out why he said what he said. McGuire has a wonderful record helping Indigenous Australians. If he’d thrown himself at the mercy of the public, not tried to excuse his conduct and had others defend his record fighting racism his reputation would have been largely unaffected. We all make mistakes. But he didn’t. Much of the good work from the Friday night was undone. I H Clockwise: Nicky Winmar at Victoria Park in 1993 (Pic by Wayne Ludbey ©Fairfax Media); McGuire; Goodes reacts to Magpie fan. pg.22|Fromcrisistoheroandbackagain–BenjaminHaslem
- 23. WHEREEDDIEGOTITRIGHT A BRIEF GUIDE TO CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS * 1 Candour: The outward recognition through the prompt, spoken public acknowledgement that a problem exists. McGuire spoke to media at the MCG immediately but preceded this by going straight to the Sydney dressing rooms, knowing this would be captured on live TV. 2 Explanation: 1. Promptly and briefly explain why the problem occurred and the known underlying reasons or behaviours that led to the situation. 2. Talk about what was learned from the situation and how it will influence the organisation's future behaviour. 3. Unconditionally commit to regularly report all additional information, or until no public interest remains. McGuire obviously couldn’t explain the girl’s behaviour but could emphasise that Collingwood had a zero tolerance to such incidents, thereby taking responsibility for tackling racism amongst its own players, staff and supporters. 3 Declaration: A public commitment and discussion of specific, positive steps to be taken conclusively address the issues and resolve the situation. This commitment was demonstrated simply by McGuire seeking out Goodes and then apologising to him in person and later at the media conference. Then declaring: "We'll go and tell her parents or whatever the case may be, we're not having this rubbish.” 4 Contrition: The continuing verbalization of regret, empathy, sympathy, even embarrassment. Take appropriate responsibility for having allowed the situation to occur in the first place, whether by omission, commission, accident, or negligence. McGuire told reporters after the game: "I wanted to apologise to Adam on behalf of football in general and ask that he would accept our apologies. "I said 'we won't stand for this, we have a zero tolerance'. He's been such a wonderful leader in this great week in our football code. 5 Consultation & Commitment: Promptly ask for help and counsel from victims, government, and the community of origin - even from opponents. Directly involve and request the participation of those most directly affected to help develop more permanent solutions, more acceptable behaviours, and to design principles and approaches that will preclude similar problems from occurring. Speaking after the game, McGuire said: “I said that we would find out what the hell has gone on,” he said. “They're saying it was a 14-year-old girl or whatever, I don't care. We'll go and tell her parents or whatever the case may be, we're not having this rubbish.” 6 Restitution: Find a way to quickly pay the price. Adverse situations remediated quickly cost far less and are controversial for much shorter periods of time. McGuire sought out Goodes as soon as the match concluded. * James E. Lukaszewski (1999) Seven Dimensions Of Crisis Communication Management: A Strategic Analysis And Planning Mode, Ragan's Communications Journal, January/February 1999
- 24. Many Australian companies and not-for-profit organisations have highly structured and well managed issues management and public relations functions within their organisations. Those who do not, or who are having difficulty with their communications, should seriously consider a properly structured and strategically focussed program that will have a notable positive impact on their stakeholder engagement. Well planned public relations - with properly defined objectives that are tied to a business or marketing plan - can provide additional reinforcement to a company’s position in the market place. Strategic issues management and consistent roll-out of public relations activity can provide a number of benefits: Support overall marketing efforts; Raise profile and spruce image; Protect and enhance reputation; Bestow leadership – over time; Provide a competitive edge; and Help manage stakeholder relationships. An effective public relations plan (including stakeholder and issues management planning) identifies the strategic position and rolls out continuing and consistent information to achieve a company’s communications objectives. This may include stories based on tangible matters, such as current events and issues, into which an industry may have an input (based on professional expertise and specialisations). It also involves properly managing and interacting with key stakeholders including government, opposition, media, customers, community, and retailers. The first steps in this process are: Work with companies to develop a strategic communications plan to drive appropriate stakeholder, issues management, media and other public relations activity; and Talk with a company’s executives to identify events, activities, milestones and developments that can be conveyed as information through the media, social media, to government and so on. While media relations on an ad hoc basis will often deliver some variable success, it is unlikely to drive through in full measure, the benefits identified above. Because the benefits are great writes John Wells 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 pg.24|WhydoPR?–JohnWells
- 25. For the past 21 Years John was a founding partner and senior consultant in one of Australia’s leading public relations companies, Jackson Wells. Prior to that John’s career embraced journalism at the most senior levels in Australia and overseas. He has extensive experience in media management in both television and radio, has provided policy advice to Federal political leaders and offers public affairs consulting. Benjamin has 20 years’ experience in the media. Ben worked at Jackson Wells for nine years, where he managed and worked on complex projects and became a Director and CEO. Ben possesses an acute understanding of mainstream media, having spent the best part of a decade working for The Australian newspaper in Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne. Ben has lectured students from the City University of Hong Kong on public relations and government affairs. Immediately before joining Jackson Wells, Ben was The Australian newspaper’s High Court correspondent and regularly acted as Chief-of-Staff at the Sydney Bureau. From 1999-2002, he was based in the Parliamentary press gallery in Canberra. Alexandra has over five years’ experience in the public relations industry and a communications degree from Charles Sturt University. Alexandra previously: was an Account Manager at Jackson Wells; headed up marketing and media at an extreme sports publishing company; and worked with a consumer public relations consultancy. Kerry’s career has embraced the highest levels of Australian political life and the cutting edge of business development. He was an ALP Senator for NSW for 19 years, including President of the Australian Senate from 1987 until retiring from Parliament in 1994 to become Australia’s High Commissioner to Zimbabwe and six other southern African nations. He is a former director of Zimbabwe Platinum Mines and World IT. From 2003 to 2010 he served the Government of the Republic of Mozambique as their Honorary Consul-General in Australia. In 1996, he was awarded an Order of Australia. Kerry Sibraa AO Special Counsel Julie has 20 years’ experience in public policy in both the government and private sectors. She began her roles in government during the Hawke/Keating era, working with Federal parliamentarians including the Health Minister where she had responsibility for drug policy, mental health and women’s health. She later worked for NSW Minister John Della Bosca, for nine years, the office of the Premier of NSW, and was COS to the NSW Treasurer. In 2009 was the Deputy Chief of Staff to the Federal Minister for Employment Participation. Julie spent nearly two years as National Policy Manager for Infrastructure Partnerships Australia. Julie Sibraa Special Counsel The Wells Haslem Team John Wells Chairman Benjamin Haslem CEO Alexandra Mayhew Partner
- 26. Ron is one of WA’s most respected government relations specialists, enjoying an excellent working relationship with all sides of politics. From 1983-1993, he was Federal MP for the Perth electorate of Stirling. Prior to leaving parliament, Ron was Deputy Speaker. In 2006 he was awarded a PhD in Education from the University of WA, which investigated factors that promote social inclusion. Ron is a keen AFL fan and in 1994 helped established The Graham (Polly) Farmer Foundation. He has been a Board member since its inception. Ron, who has extensive experience in the fisheries and mining sectors, assists Wells Haslem clients communicate with the WA State Government and Federal MPs and Senators based in WA. Wells Haslem Affiliates and Counsel Ron Edwards WesternAustralia Trevor has 25 years’ experience across PR and government. A pioneer in digital media, Trevor Co- authored one of the first Australian monographs for corporates on social media. Prior to being an independent consultant (2008 – 2012), Trevor was Principal Consultant and Partner at Jackson Wells for 11 years. Trevor began his career as a ministerial adviser to John Dawkins and as a senior executive in the Australian Public Service, Department of Industrial Relations. Trevor holds a Bachelor of Economics (Honours) (1981) and a PhD (2012) from the University of Sydney. Trevor is a casual lecturer in Australian politics at University of Sydney. Michael is a former diplomat, front- bench federal politician, consultant, journalist, public company director, stockbroker, TV panellist and commentator, author and public speaker. He is Deputy Chairman of the American Australian Association Ltd, a member of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra Council and a former board-member of the United States Studies Centre at Sydney University. He is a contributor to the Spectator Magazine and a former regular columnist in the Australian Financial Review. Michael Baume AO Special Counsel (Emeritus) Dr Trevor Cook Digital Counsel Rob Masters Melbourne Robert Masters & Associates (RMA) is a strategic communication and stakeholder engagement consultancy. Since its inception, its approach to strategic communication programs, community consultation and stakeholder engagement processes have earned it a reputation of being at the leading edge of communication management for over 30 years. Rob’s services and clients cover the energy sector (oil, gas, coal), electricity, forestry, government (federal, state, local) water, finance, automotive, health and health research, pharmaceutical, education, transport (road and rail), information technology, primary industry, environment and retail. pg.26
- 27. 7 Originally elected as a National Party MP, Katter resigned to become an Independent in July 2001 and in 2011 formed his own party, Katter's Australian Party. 8 As New England is currently held by Windsor, the seat is shown with his two-candidate preferred margin versus the National Party. As Windsor is retiring, the more relevant margin would be the National Party's 16.8% TPP margin versus Labor. 1 Livermore is retiring at 2013 election Antony Green is an ABC Election Analyst, providing analysis of all aspects of elections and electoral systems in Australia Read more at: blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen Follow Antony on twitter: @AntonyGreenABC Election Timing and the Issues of Election Writs Boothby (SA) 0.6% Andrew Southcott Hasluck (WA) 0.6% Ken Wyatt Aston (VIC) 0.7% Alan Tudge Dunkley (VIC) 1.0% Bruce Billson Brisbane (QLD) 1.1% Teresa Gambaro Macquarie (NSW) 1.3% Louise Markus Forde (QLD) 1.6% Bert Van Manen Solomon (NT) 1.8% Natasha Griggs Casey (VIC) 1.9% Tony Smith Longman (QLD) 1.9% Wyatt Roy Canning (WA) 2.2% Don Randall Herbert (QLD) 2.2% Ewen Jones Dawson (QLD) 2.4% George Christensen Swan (WA) 2.5% Steve Irons Bonner (QLD) 2.8% Ross Vasta Macarthur (NSW) 3.0% Russell Matheson Bennelong (NSW) 3.1% John Alexander Flynn (QLD) 3.6% Ken O'Dowd Sturt (SA) 3.6% Christopher Pyne Fisher (QLD) 4.1% Peter Slipper4 McMillan (VIC) 4.2% Russell Broadbent Leichhardt (QLD) 4.6% Warren Entsch Dickson (QLD) 5.1% Peter Dutton Australian Labor Party Liberal-National Coalition Corangamite (VIC) 0.3% Darren Cheeseman Deakin (VIC) 0.6% Mike Symon Greenway (NSW) 0.9% Michelle Rowland Robertson (NSW) 1.0% Deborah O'Neill Lindsay (NSW) 1.1% David Bradbury Moreton (QLD) 1.1% Graham Perrett Banks (NSW) 1.5% Daryl Melham La Trobe (VIC) 1.7% Laura Smyth Petrie (QLD) 2.5% Yvette D'Ath Reid (NSW) 2.7% John Murphy Lilley (QLD) 3.2% Wayne Swan Brand (WA) 3.3% Gary Gray Capricornia (QLD) 3.7% Kirsten Livermore1 Lingiari (NT) 3.7% Warren Snowdon Blair (QLD) 4.2% Shayne Neumann Eden-Monaro(NSW) 4.2% Mike Kelly Grayndler (NSW) 4.2%vGRN Anthony Albanese 2 Page (NSW) 4.2% Janelle Saffin Parramatta (NSW) 4.4% Julie Owens Dobell (NSW) 5.1% Craig Thomson3 Others Denison (TAS) IND 1.2% v ALP Andrew Wilkie Melbourne (VIC) GRN 5.9% v ALP Adam Bandt 5 Lyne (NSW) IND 12.7% v NAT Rob Oakeshott6 Kennedy (QLD) KAP 18.3% v LNP Bob Katter7 NewEngland(NSW) IND 21.5% v NAT Tony Windsor 8 Notes 2 The Liberals are likely to finish third on the primary vote. 3 Thomson was elected as the Labor candidate in 2010 but excluded from the Labor Party in 2012 over his involvement in the on-going Health Services Union affair. He is completing his term as an Independent but Dobell is still classed as a Labor-held electorate. 4 In 2010 Slipper was elected for the first time representing the LNP, but parted company with the party and became an Independent in late 2011 after accepting Labor's offer to become Speaker of the House of Representatives. Former Howard Government Minister Mal Brough is the LNP candidate for this seat. 6 Independent MP Rob Oakeshott is retiring at the 2013 election - As Lyne is currently held by Independent Robe Oakeshott, the seat is shown with his two- candidate preferred margin versus the National Party. As Oakeshott is retiring, the more relevant margin would be the National Party's 12.5% TPP margin versus Labor. Twice recently I’ve been told of a scenario that sees Australia going to the polls on 24 August. The scenario sees the Labor caucus meeting on Monday 22 July to approve Kevin Rudd's proposed rules for electing the Labor Party Leader. Kevin Rudd would then visit the Governor General on Tuesday 23 July to call an election for 24 August. Nice theory, but a Tuesday visit to the Governor General would require the election to be held on 31 August, not 24 August. The writs for a 24 August election have to be issued on Monday 22 July, and there are several complications that make announcing an election and issuing writs the same day difficult. Electoral Pendulum The electoral pendulum orders seats from the most marginal to safest based on results of the last election. Included below are marginal seats, that is, seats with a 5% or less (5.1% also included). 5 The first Green to win a seat in the House of Representatives at a general election.
- 28. CLIENTS Asia Society Australia Australian Constructors Association Australian Water Holdings Balmain Leagues Club Boehringer Ingelheim British American Tobacco Church of Scientology Insurance Council of Australia James Hardie CONTACT Wells Haslem Strategic Public Affairs +61 2 9033 8667 mail@wellshaslem.com.au wellshaslem.com.au Suite 32 Level 1, 50 Yeo St (PO Box 223) Neutral Bay NSW 2089 Designed and produced by Wells Haslem Strategic Public Affairs PTY LTD July 2013 Manly Warringah Sea Eagles Mercer Minerals Council of NSW Mission Australia NRMA The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church Sonartech Atlas The Whitlam Institute University of Western Sydney Zurich Financial Services Australia L-R: Wells Haslem’s Alexandra Mayhew; Alex Sanchez (Insurance Council of Australia); Tony Mobbs (Allianz) and Benjamin Haslem at the Insurance Council of Australia’s annual dinner in Sydney in May