|
|
|
Print
this article |
Email
this article
Getting
What You Need Through Successful Public Affairs
Politics!
Not interested. Politicians! I wouldn't give them
the time of day.
Not
uncommon sentiments for many, but today there isn't
a business or organisation that can afford to ignore
the impact governments can, and do, have through their
actions.
And
if it's not government it may be some other influential
organisation, the general public or the media that
affect public debate about issues related to your
business.
Like
it or not, realise it or not, decisions made in the
public sector shape, influence and impact not only
how your business or organisation operates but can
significantly effect its reputation.
An
ongoing public affairs strategy involving monitoring
and managing public debate and critical government
decisions, legislation and direction, can influence
public policy decision-making and improve corporate/government
relationships.
In
further articles below, we note a number of inquiries
and reviews currently underway that will impact on
many organisations and businesses in the health and
education and training sectors.
Here,
we identify how developing a successful public affairs
strategy can deliver the outcomes you need when confronted
with a changing public or political landscape.
Through
our years of experience and research a successful
public affairs strategy has a number of key elements
worth keeping in mind:
 Monitoring
and following the political and public climate.
Identifying
and understanding the key players and/or decision
makers.
Developing
your argument with demonstrable evidence.
Identifying
the strengths and weakness of your case.
Understanding
the counter or opponents argument and its strengths
and weakness.
Timing
is critical. Early engagement and presentation of
your case generally avoids trying to influence or
change a policy decision that has already been made.
Identifying
your likely supporters. They may be useful ambassadors
for your case and cause.
Don't
forget the Senate or the upper house. Even if the
Government controls the chamber in its own right,
many of these members are influential in the decision
making process and/or well connected to key players.
Briefing
and keeping others who may have an interest in your
case informed, such as backbench Members of Parliament.
Identifying
and briefing Members of Parliament on Party or Parliamentary
Committees relevant to your issue.
Consider
informing or trying to persuade those with an opposing
or different view early in the process.
Liaising
and briefing relevant public servants and political
advisers in Ministerial Offices.
Consider
briefing the Parliamentary Press Gallery or other
media. They may add weight to your case if presented
correctly and it provides an interesting story. This
process needs to be carefully considered and sensitive
to the discussions you are having with Government.
Accepting
offers of assistance and be specific about how they
can help.
Keeping
all those involved briefed as the strategy develops
and particularly if it changes.
Briefings
should be just that - brief, friendly and businesslike.
These briefings should always be followed up with
a "thank you" and the provision of additional
material if appropriate.
Focus
on advancing your positive argument or case rather
than simply being critical of the alternative positions.
Above
all, we find that a successful public affairs strategy
is an ongoing process. It involves understanding the
policy making process, public opinion development
and influencing as well as building and developing
relationships.
If
you'd like to now more about developing a successful
public affairs strategy to help you get what you need
for your organisation or business contact us by clicking
here.
|
|
|
|
| An
analysis of Newspoll results over the past 15
years shows that there has been a seismic shift
on voters' views on which political party is best
to handle the issues voters consider the most
important.
Springboard
Australia's Founding Director, Tim Grau, shows
how voters have been deserting Labor for the Liberal/National
parties for years.
The
recent Newspoll published in The Australian
identifying which issues are important on
how Australians vote in Federal elections again
demonstrate the strength of the position of the
Liberal/National Coalition Government.
Predictably,
health and Medicare, education, the economy, welfare
and social issues as well as national security
rate highly.
The
strength of the Howard Government's position is
not simply revealed in the latest results, but
a detailed examination of the relative positions
of the Liberal/National Party Coalition and the
Australian Labor Party on these issues over time.
Springboard
Australia has tracked and analysed Newspoll results
in these surveys dating back to when they were
first collected, sometimes in the late 1980s and
1990s, at the height of the Hawke and Keating
Government success.
That
analysis reveals the massive ground shift that
has occurred in the minds of voters and the commanding
position the Liberal/National parties have on
key issues.
It
also highlights the difficult task ahead for Labor.
On
health and Medicare, the latest
Newspoll the Liberal/National parties are considered
the best to handle the issue by 37% of Australians
with the Labor Opposition rating 40%.
But
in 2003, the Liberal/National parties rated only
30% to Labor's 38%.
So
over the past two years there has been a 7% improvement
for the Coalition parties while only a 2% lift
for the ALP.
More
striking, is the results for the same poll taken
during the Keating era.
In
April 1991, the Liberal/National parties were
considered the best to handle the issue by 29%
of voters compared to 39% for the ALP.
Immediately
prior to the 1993 Keating victory, the ALP rated
40% to the Liberal/National Opposition 29% in
July 1992.
By
September 1994, after the ALP won its fifth election
with Paul Keating as leader, the Government had
a commanding lead over the Liberal/National Coalition
of 45% to 26%.
So
since 1994 to February 2005, the ALP has lost
five percentage points and the Liberal/National
parties have increased 12% when voters are asked
who is best to handle health and Medicare.
In
education, long considered a
strength for Labor, the picture is not much better.
In fact it may be even worse.
While
results in this policy area have only been measured
since May 1999, the shift is just as dramatic.
At
that time (May 1999) the Liberal/National parties
was considered the best party to handle education
by just 30% of voters compared to 39% of voters
for the ALP.
In
June 2001, the ALP led the Coalition Government
on this measure by 15% with 42% of voters saying
the Labor Opposition was best to handle education
compared to 27% for the Liberal/National parties.
By
February 2003, the Coalition Government had lifted
its rating to 33% and by February 2005 it had
risen again to 39%, just one percent behind Labor
on 40%.
Which
ever way one looks at it the Liberal/National
parties have made considerable improvement in
its rating by voters when it comes to education.
Between
June 2001 to February 2005 they have lifted their
rating from 27% to 39%, a 12 percent increase,
while the Labor Party has dropped two percent
from 42% to 40% over the same period.
|
|
| Again,
on welfare and social issues,
the Liberal/National parties have significantly
improved their performance.
In
February 2003, 28 percent of voters said the Liberal/National
parties were best to handle these issues.
By
2005 it had risen to 35%, a seven percent increase.
Labor over the same period rose just two percent
to 42%.
Historically,
the Liberal/National parties improvement is even
more impressive.
In
September 1994, the Coalition parties scored just
23% support among voters compared to the Keating
Government's 44%.
So
in just over 10 years, the Coalition parties have
improved their performance by 12 percent while
the ALP has gone backwards two percent.
On
national security, the ALP's
appalling position in the post September 11, 2001
environment continues with only 21% of voters
say they would be best to handle it compared to
the Liberal/National parties at 57%.
Notably,
in the nine months since June 2004 to February
2005, the Liberal/National parties rating improved
seven percent from 50% and the LP dropped five
percent from 26%.
Labor's
desperate position is also reflected in polling
on the economy and related issues.
In
February 2005, the Liberal/National Government
scored an impressive 60% to 20% for the Labor
Opposition.
Compare
this to the results on polls taken in February
and March 1990 when the ALP led by 37% to 33%
and 37% to 31% respectively.
Sobering
indeed that since the height of the Hawke/Keating
reforms the ALP has dropped 18% while the Liberal/National
parties has risen 31% in the area of the economy
and related issues.
On
taxation, Labor was considered
the best party to handle the issue by 39% of voters
compared to 30% voters for the Liberal/National
parties in September 1994.
By
June 2004, the Liberal/National parties has risen
to 41% and the ALP dropped to 34%.
On
interest rates, even during and
after the high interest rates in the 1980s and
1990s, the ALP performed better than today when
voters were asked who can handle the issue best.
Their
best performance on this measure in September
1994 was 40% to the LIberal/National parties 28%.
By
February 2002, the Liberal/National parties had
dramatically risen to 52% and the ALP plummeted
to just 19% voters support - a 24% turn around
for the Coalition parties and a 21% collapse for
the ALP.
The
results on inflation are much
the same.
In
July 1992, just prior to the Keating election
victory the ALP was considered the best party
to handle inflation by 33% of voters and 34% for
the Coalition parties.
In
September 1994, after Keating's historic win,
40% of voters said the new Government was best
to handle inflation compared to 29% for the Liberal/National
parties.
But
by June 2004, the Liberal/National parties were
considered the best to handle inflation by 52%
of voters compared to 22% saying the ALP was better.
Again
in little over 10 years the Liberal/National parties
have improved by 23% and the ALP had dropped by
18%.
As
Springboard Australia noted in our July
2004 Newsletter in the lead up to last year's
poll, John Howard and his Government have been
working successfully at minimising their negatives
and improving votes perceptions on the Government's
management of key issues.
These
figures and analysis demonstrates that this has
not just been a recent phenomenon.
Critically,
it has more than dramatically shifted voters'
perceptions, in many cases it has reversed previously
held views.
Tim
Grau was interviewed by Radio National's Fran
Kelly on these findings. Listen
to the full interview here.
|
|
Federal
Primary Voting Intention
As
we noted in our February
2005 Newsletter, the Howard Government will continue
to dominate the Labor Opposition while the ALP primary
vote remains below 40%. The most recent Newspoll published
in The Australian shows that Kim Beazley's
return to the ALP leadership has yet to lift the ALP's
primary vote support above that key figure.
The
graph below plots the primary vote support for the
Coalition Government and the Labor Opposition. It
shows that the Coalition's primary vote is 47% and
the ALP's primary vote support languishing at 36%,
below the level it received at the October 2004 election.
Howard's
Commanding Lead as Preferred Prime Minister
John
Howard continues to remain the preferred Prime Minister
by most Australians according to the latest Newspoll
results published in The Australian. In March,
54% of Australians preferred Howard to Kim Beazley
(30%) as Prime Minister.
Continuing
our series, the graph below plots the preferred Prime
Minister results since 1987. Notably, Beazley is still
11% behind the level he obtained in the October 1998
Federal Election when he was Opposition Leader, where
he was preferred Prime Minister by 41% to Howard's
40%.
Print
this article |
Email
this article
|
|
|
Print
this article |
Email
this article
Federal
Education Reforms Continue
After
implementing some of the most sweeping reforms to
the higher education sector in the last term of the
Howard Government, Federal Education, Science and
Training Minister, Brendan Nelson is continuing at
a pace with a raft of new reforms to, or reviews of,
Australia's education sector.
Brendan
Nelson has instigated a range of reviews and reforms
that will have a lasting impact on the Australian
landscape and will have profound implications for
existing and new players in the education and training
sector.
Some
of the key initiatives include:
Rationalising Responsibility for Higher Education
in Australia
The
Government has released a discussion paper to start
a debate around the issue of rationalising the responsibility
for higher education in Australia.
The
paper describes the evolving nature of Federal and
State involvement in higher education and the implications
of the current division of responsibilities between
the Australian Government and the State and Territory
governments.
There
are 39 publicly funded higher education providers
in Australia of which 37 have been accorded the title
of university. In addition, there are three private
universities and a number of other self-accrediting
and non self-accrediting institutions which provide
higher education throughout Australia. Altogether
they served more than 929,000 students in 2003.
State
and Territory responsibilities for universities vary
in, for example, funding and capital assistance, appointing
Board members and some accountability requirements.
The
paper argues that a discussion is warranted as to
whether Australia would be better placed in a competitive
global economy if these jurisdictional arrangements
for universities were rationalised.
It
argues the complexities in the current shared arrangements,
a lack of consistency to the largely historically
determined nature of them, and limitations and constraints
that result from having nine jurisdictions involved.
The
paper states it is timely to consider the case for
change, because there is a growing need for the Australian
higher education sector to be recognisable as a truly
national system, and recognised for its high quality,
in the face of rapid globalisation of higher education.
It argues that duplication and ambiguity in regulation
of the sector need to be minimised for Australia to
be positioned to attract the best researchers , teachers
and students and for Australian universities to be
increasingly internationally renowned.
National
Inquiry into Teacher Training
The
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education
and Vocational Training is conducting an inquiry into
the quality of teacher-training courses.
The
House of Representatives inquiry will include an examination
of:
The
Future Diversity of Australian Universities
An
issues paper focused on building diversity in the
higher education system has been released to inform
the broader national debate on the future of Australia's
universities.
The
paper canvasses a range of issues and considers whether
Australian can continue to expect a one-size-fits-all
model of higher education to compete with the world's
best, cater to regional communities and offer excellence
in teaching and research.
The
paper seeks discussion and consideration of a number
of issues, including:
Australian
Technical Colleges
The
Federal Government will establish 24 Australian Technical
Colleges providing high quality tuition in both academic
and vocational education for students in Years 11 and
12.
The
Technical Colleges will be located in regions suffering
skill shortages, with high rates of youth unemployment;
and supported by a significant industry base.
The
Colleges will provide tuition for up to 7,200 students
per year.
Each
Technical College will be based on local industry needs,
local infrastructure, and economic demands and future
growth. it is expected that tenders will be submitted
by consortia of local businesses, industry representatives,
schools - government or non-government - TAFE and other
registered training organisations, and universities.
Colleges may be based on new or shared campuses of existing
organisations or totally new institutions.
The
first of these Colleges will commence in 2006.
Springboard
Australia is monitoring these reviews and reforms
and can assist any organisation wanting to contribute
to them or be kept informed of developments.
Print
this article |
Email
this article
|
|
|
Print
this article |
Email
this article
Two
Parliamentary Inquiries Put Focus
on Health System
Two Parliamentary Inquiries will put Australia's health
system under the spotlight and are likely to lead
to significant reforms.
The
first inquiry, being conducted by the House of Representatives
Standing Committee on Health and Ageing, will examine
the complex arrangements currently in place for health
funding.
The
second inquiry is being conducted by the Senate Select
Committee on Mental Health. It will inquire into and
report by 6 October 2005 on the provision of mental
health services in Australia.
Inquiry
into Health Funding
The
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health
and Ageing will examine how the Australian government
can improve the efficient and effective delivery of
high quality health care to all Australians.
The
Committee has invited interested persons and organisations
to make submissions addressing the terms of reference
by 6 May 2005.
The
Committee will inquire into and report on how the
Commonwealth Government can take a leading role in
improving the efficient and effective delivery of
highest-quality health care to all Australians.
The
Committee will have reference to the unique characteristics
of the Australian health system, particularly its strong
mix of public and private funding and service delivery.
The
Committee shall give particular consideration to:
-
examining
the roles and responsibilities of the different
levels of government (including local government)
for health and related services;
-
simplifying
funding arrangements, and better defining roles
and responsibilities, between the different levels
of government, with a particular emphasis on hospitals;
-
considering
how and whether accountability to the Australian
community for the quality and delivery of public
hospitals and medical services can be improved;
-
how best to ensure that a strong private health
sector can be sustained into the future, based on
positive relationships between private health funds,
private and public hospitals, medical practitioners,
other health professionals and agencies in various
levels of government; and
-
while accepting the continuation of the Commonwealth
commitment to the 30 per cent and Senior’s
Private Health Insurance Rebates, and Lifetime Health
Cover, identify innovative ways to make private
health insurance a still more attractive option
to Australians who can afford to take some responsibility
for their own health cover.
With
such wide ranging terms of reference and State Premiers
already indicating an interest in changing their roles
in the health sector, including allowing the Commonwealth
to take over responsibility for hospitals, the Inquiry
is likely to recommend fundamental changes to the Australian
health sector.
Select
Committee on Mental Health
The
Senate Select Committee on Mental Health was appointed
on 8 March 2005 to inquire into and report by 6 October
2005 on the provision of mental health services in
Australia, with particular reference to:
-
the
extent to which the National Mental Health Strategy,
the resources committed to it and the division of
responsibility for policy and funding between all
levels of government have achieved its aims and
objectives, and the barriers to progress;
-
the adequacy of various modes of care for people
with a mental illness, in particular, prevention,
early intervention, acute care, community care,
after hours crisis services and respite care;
-
opportunities
for improving coordination and delivery of funding
and services at all levels of government to ensure
appropriate and comprehensive care is provided throughout
the episode of care;
-
the
appropriate role of the private and non-government
sectors;
-
the extent to which unmet need in supported accommodation,
employment, family and social support services,
is a barrier to better mental health outcomes;
-
the special needs of groups such as children, adolescents,
the aged, Indigenous Australians, the socially and
geographically isolated and of people with complex
and co-morbid conditions and drug and alcohol dependence;
-
the role and adequacy of training and support for
primary carers in the treatment, recovery and support
of people with a mental illness;
-
the role of primary health care in promotion, prevention,
early detection and chronic care management;
-
opportunities for reducing the effects of iatrogenesis
and promoting recovery-focused care through consumer
involvement, peer support and education of the mental
health workforce, and for services to be consumer-operated;
-
the overrepresentation of people with a mental illness
in the criminal justice system and in custody, the
extent to which these environments give rise to
mental illness, the adequacy of legislation and
processes in protecting their human rights and the
use of diversion programs for such people;
-
the practice of detention and seclusion within mental
health facilities and the extent to which it is
compatible with human rights instruments, humane
treatment and care standards, and proven practice
in promoting engagement and minimising treatment
refusal and coercion;
-
the adequacy of education in de-stigmatising mental
illness and disorders and in providing support service
information to people affected by mental illness
and their families and carers;
-
the proficiency and accountability of agencies,
such as housing, employment, law enforcement and
general health services, in dealing appropriately
with people affected by mental illness;
-
the current state of mental health research, the
adequacy of its funding and the extent to which
best practice is disseminated;
-
the adequacy of data collection, outcome measures
and quality control for monitoring and evaluating
mental health services at all levels of government
and opportunities to link funding with compliance
with national standards; and
- the
potential for new modes of delivery of mental health
care, including e-technology.
Submissions
from interested parties are to be received by April
28 before a series of public hearings will be held around
the country.
|
|
Print
this article |
Email
this article
New
West Australian Cabinet
Newly
re-elected West Australian Premier Geoff Gallop has
expanded his Cabinet from 14 to 17, with five new
faces to the front bench.
The
five new Cabinet members are: Rockingham MLA Mark
McGowan; Cockburn MLA Fran Logan; Ballajura MLA John
D'Orazio; Murchison Eyre MLA John Bowler; and Mining
and Pastoral MLC Jon Ford
The
full new West Australian Cabinet is as follows:
The
Hon. Geoff Gallop
Premier; Public Sector Management; Water Resources;
Federal Affairs
The
Hon. Eric Ripper
Deputy
Premier; Treasurer; Government Enterprises; Assisting
in Public Sector Management
The
Hon. Kim Chance
Agriculture; Forestry; Mid-West, Wheatbelt
The
Hon. Ljiljanna Ravlich
Education and Training
The
Hon. John Kobelke
Consumer and Employment Protection; Indigenous Affairs;
Assisting in Water Resources
The
Hon. Jim McGinty
Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs
The
Hon. Judy Edwards
Environment; Science.
The
Hon. Michelle Roberts
Police, Emergency Services; Community Safety
The
Hon. Alannah MacTiernan
Planning and Infrastructure
The
Hon. Alan Carpenter
State Development; Energy
The
Hon. Sheila McHale
Community Development; Culture and the Arts; Women's
Interests
The
Hon. Bob Kucera
Disability
Services; Sport and Recreation; Citizenship and Multicultural
Interests; Seniors
The
Hon. Mark McGowan
Tourism; Racing and Gaming; Youth; Peel and the South-West
The
Hon. Fran Logan
Housing and Works; Heritage; Assisting in Planning
and Infrastructure
The
Hon. John Bowler
Local Government and Regional Development; Land Information;
Goldfields-Esperance, Great Southern
The
Hon. John D'Orazio
Justice; Small Business
The
Hon. Jon Ford
Fisheries; Kimberley; Pilbara and Gascoyne
Print
this article |
Email
this article
|
|
|
|
| The
2005 Springboard Australia Calendar has been updated
and is available online.
The Calendar includes the sitting dates for all Australian
Parliaments and other key events. If you have an event
or know an important date that should be included we
welcome your suggestions.
The 2005 Springboard Australia Calendar is available
here.
If you have an event or know an important date that
should be included we welcome your suggestions. Click
here
to send additions.
|
Email
this article |
|
|
Subscribe
and Unsubscribe |
|
Springboard
Australia's Newsletters are designed to give you a quick
update on key activities happening in government, politics
and the media that are important to you and your organisation.
We
will keep it brief, factual and relevant providing you
with tips, news, events and insight to the world of
politics, media, business and the community.
If
you find this information interesting, please pass it
onto your colleagues.
If
you have any suggestions or comments we welcome your
feedback. Send your views to: mail@springboard.net.au.
To
Subscribe
If
you would like to subscribe to Springboard Australia's
Newsletter click here.
To
Unsubscribe
We
do not wish to inconvenience anyone by sending mail
they do not wish to receive. We also seek to comply
with the recently passed Spam Act. So to be removed
from these mail outs please click
here.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
