AFLP ~ New Name/Slogan ~ Is it needed

[Derek Bullock]

This is totally off topic but read and smile.


Derek

Scotland reveals stunning new slogan


Article from: AAP


By staff writers
November 29, 2007 09:50am



AFTER spending six months and $282,000 on a new slogan, Scottish tourism officials have come up with ... "Welcome to Scotland".
The slogan, which was revealed on Tuesday, will replace airport signs proclaiming Scotland "the best small country in the world", the Times newspaper reported.
The slogan will also printed on the posters in Gaelic as "Failte gu Alba".
The posters include a series of images depicting life in Scotland, including a boy looking at an exhibit at Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum in Glasgow, a man in a raincoat walking in Edinburgh and a picture taken from a high altitude of Inverness.

The campaign has been criticised for lacking emotion.

"It feels governmental, corporate and static," Anita Califano, a senior consultant with 2012 London Olympics logo creator Wolff Olins, told The Times.
"It all fails to convey the spirit of the place, the emotion. If the purpose of branding is to create an emotional connection, they're not doing that."

[Derek Bullock]

On a serious note I think that if a new identity is required this should be taken note of from the above:
"It all fails to convey the spirit of the place, the emotion. If the purpose of branding is to create an emotional connection, they're not doing that."

[Adamy]

I dont know the definitive answer to that question, but as a gut reaction YES! a new name maybe new party altogether is needed.... BUT... and its a very big but...

It doesnt matter what the new party name, branding, slogan or whatever, IF TFP (BOB Smith) wants to act the spoiler role again by using the name and brand recognition of "The Fishing Party", they/he can at any time they choose and thus fracture any intended vote.

This is I believe the greatest threat to any "new" outdoors lifestyle party wanting to capture the fishing vote. This is the threat that must be eliminated before any progress can be made.

Just my opinion.

Adam

[DR]

The UNITED AUSTRALIA PARTY UAP::)

& i think KC needs to be involved, as either a candidate or on the executive, but not both, too much pressure. As i read somewhere, a candidate who is articulate & media savvy is required. I believe fishing should be removed from the name as it now has a stigma attached.. just my 2 cents.. will keep banking as i change my thoughts ::)

[Fafnir]

AFTER spending six months and $282,000 on a new slogan, Scottish tourism officials have come up with ... "Welcome to Scotland".


What was that saying again? You get what you pay for? Welcome to Scotland = $282,000??? I could understand if the Irish paid that much for a slogan saying Welcome to Ireland. But the Scotish???

[Chris Ryan]

The jury is out for me on the name change idea. It has 6 months of branding done thus far and has started to garner support (albeit small so far) from other interest groups. Maybe the name fishing is an issue, maybe not, maybe the colours are maybe not. I see both sides of the fence but these really are trivial issues.

I know the AFLP was releasing enormous amounts of data to the media but it didn't get any airplay in the mainstream. The local QLD paper has a green slant to it and thus even our most green of statements didn't run. Its amazing the influence media has on things.

I am sure KC won't be too far away from the party but there are some more talented people around and within the party that will pick up the baton and run with it I am sure. Yes, it will be a little different to what we have seen thus far but maybe in the washup of this whoohaaa over thepast few weeks that could be a good thing.

Time will tell but I know progress is being made already looking to the future.

Chris

[Fafnir]

Give the party an environmental slant, but one that focuses on sustainable practices and access rather than the current green extremist views and I think you will find the press a little more receptive. I doubt that there has been any sort of worthwhile branding in terms of mainstream Australians, who may or may not occasionally fish. Name change, colour change, new branding, new direction, same agenda would be my vote. That's why I initially suggested something along the lines of The Environmental Access Party. The word environmental in the name would do the party no harm. Not saying I'm an expert, just a suggestion based on my gut feel.

Remember environmental issues proved to be significant in this recent election. Fishing can be attacked, or at the least dismissed by our competition. Tapping into the 'I want to do something for the environment' mentallity would be hugely benefical I would have thought.

Also, on the point of the media - If you want something to get media exposure, you need to go about it in a certain way. Simply sending press releases and data seldom works. I have managed to get a lot of media exposure for clients in the past, but it takes a bit of leg work in the initial stages.

[Whitto]

On a serious note I think that if a new identity is required this should be taken note of from the above:
Judging from the results of the Election a Name change or Slogan is the last thing that should be addressed, fix the two party ego problem and we might be half a chance at the next election. ( Don't start dropping bombs, this is just my opinion for those who are a bit delicate), Cheers Whitto

[Chris Ryan]

Fair Point Fafnir, but if you go to the "environmental" angle, it causes more issues due to the then perceived alignment to a green movement; which is the groups causing our closure issues in the first place. I know, if you can't beat em.....but we can, and we will go further.

Let's face it, if it wasn't for two parties running we wouldn't be having this discussion as the combined 1st preference vote would have been 35,000. The AFLP maybe wouldn't have quite made the seat, but would have got to the 2nd last cut through preferences which is huge.

Whitto - if you have read KC's comments in the Have your Say thread and obtained his document, you will see why the two party thing will probably be fixed for them, rather than by them

Chris

[Boblee]

Do not take Fishing out of the name add to it but leave it there, it is the heart of the movement, I like the sound of environmental access but Lifestyle is up there and running and it tells it as it is.
If either Fishing or Lifestyle is removed someone ? else will run open slather with it and all the branding has been for nothing.
Crikey I had a mate called Grub and thought nothing of it until one day I mentioned him and strangers laughed, Shooters Party hardly draws any reaction in NSW now and the worst thing we could do is change it as TFP's friends the LDP would run with it.

[Fafnir]

I still fail to see that there has been any 'branding' done that couldn't be topped with one advertising campaign. Even on a state level you can't tell me that a bit of free media exposure and a few ads couldn't raise peoples awareness of a new name to heights greater than those that have been achieved by the fishing parties so far. (not intended to be a reflection on those who have tried so hard to this point)

The environmental angle is designed to say 'We care about the environment, we care about people being allowed reasonable access to it'. It is also designed to get non-anglers a reasonable alternative to the extreme greens.

Chances are the name will ultimately still contain the word 'fishing', I doubt my logical dislike for it will make a difference. But to get wider public support, I personally would drop it. I would also drop it because to me it does not say 4x4, diving, horse riding, hunting etc etc. The Lifestyle Party would be an excellent option. But I have mentioned name change enough now. Time to let it go.

[Chris Ryan]

There was a fair bit of advertising done with such a limited budget. I agree with your angle on the environment and it was tried and several releases to this effect were quashed by the media including one where we point out that fishos are greener than the greens!

All suggestions are taken on board and I am sure the brains trust of the party will look at them and be getting things underway if not already.

Chris

[Derek Bullock]

There was a fair bit of advertising done with such a limited budget. I agree with your angle on the environment and it was tried and several releases to this effect were quashed by the media including one where we point out that fishos are greener than the greens!

All suggestions are taken on board and I am sure the brains trust of the party will look at them and be getting things underway if not already.

Chris

Speaking of brains trust who are the members of the Executive of AFLP. I can't find anything on the website.


Derek

[Adamy]

I still fail to see that there has been any 'branding' done that couldn't be topped with one advertising campaign. Even on a state level you can't tell me that a bit of free media exposure and a few ads couldn't raise peoples awareness of a new name to heights greater than those that have been achieved by the fishing parties so far. (not intended to be a reflection on those who have tried so hard to this point)


Fafnir,

The federal election just past shows how difficult it is to change branding; AFLP spent more money on advertising, had more free ads, more free media attention, free press, brochures, stickers, radio, word of mouth advertising and promotion by tackle shops and fishing spruikers in the last few months since registration than TFPQ had in its whole 3 year history combined. And yet the vote for TFP and AFLP was almost equal. PLUS AFLP had over 400 booth workers manning booths across the state and STILL voters were confused. By the way TFP had less than 50 booth workers state wide, thats the power of a brand.

The TFPQ brand is/was a very strong brand and it takes more than just one advertising campaign - even an extended one to overcome this brand.

In all likelyhood the more that any outdoors party tried to arise and take the ground (the fishing and lifestyle vote) then TFP can always play the spoiler by simply placing their name on the ticket.

These are the primary issues that need to be addressed before any viable option can be found - otherwise failure is just beyond the horizon.

Adam

[Fafnir]

Agreed Adamy.

I believe that given that we are now 3 to 4 years away from the next election, it would be possible to brand a new name which would appeal to a much wider market. At the moment it seems that anglers, like me, are the only ones voting for the party. The 'branding' only seems to be recognised by diehard anglers and their families and friends. My gut tells me that there are many other users of the great outdoors that we are not reaching, who we could appeal to. My point is that to say the word 'fishing' should be kept because of the 'branding' that has already been done is flawed as I see it.

But you're right, whilst there is conflict in the ranks, it would be hard to move ahead regardless.

[disorderly]

Agreed Adamy.

I believe that given that we are now 3 to 4 years away from the next election, it would be possible to brand a new name which would appeal to a much wider market. At the moment it seems that anglers, like me, are the only ones voting for the party. The 'branding' only seems to be recognised by diehard anglers and their families and friends. My gut tells me that there are many other users of the great outdoors that we are not reaching, who we could appeal to. My point is that to say the word 'fishing' should be kept because of the 'branding' that has already been done is flawed as I see it.

But you're right, whilst there is conflict in the ranks, it would be hard to move ahead regardless.

Definately agree here.
A new name ..a broader appeal to a wider demographic..and certainly if the word "environment"is encompassed into the party name then all the better.
I mean as fisho's we are by definition ,custodians of the environment for the future...and our definition of "green" is a more practical use of the environment that causes the least amount of damage whilst allowing a growing population to be able to enjoy and utilize it.We definately need to join with other outdoors types and even tug at the heartstrings of those that do/will/might one day/might want there kids to be able to enjoy the outdoors in a sustainable way.
For us to continue to enjoy our pastime we need to perhaps be a little less idealistic and a lot more politically savvy.
To KC and those others that gave it a go ...good onya fella's (probably a little sore around the rear end but politics can do that to you http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/../yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/undecided.gif.)
And why the silence from shane and the NSW mob..why wont they expose themselves to public scrutiny?

Scott

[Chris Ryan]

Speaking of brains trust who are the members of the Executive of AFLP. I can't find anything on the website.


Derek

Hey Derek,

The Executive member names are not published on the website but they are to the members and was circulated to the members after the last AGM. The Registered Officer is KC, the Deputy Officer is Paul Tabell which is publicly available on the AEC website.

Also as it has already been mentioned in the past on one of the pre-election threads, I am one of the Executive members of the AFLP.

Chris

[John L]

Another problem is that a lot of fishermen are also shooters and so will vote for the Shooters Party. Perhaps the AFLP and Shooters Party need to run a joint ticket to avoid splitting the vote there as well.

[Burley_Boy]

Umm am I missing something here.
The issue at this election was not the name of the party, it was the fracture between the two entities. This is the sole reason there is not a senator with a fishing banner.
We don't need to get a wider audience we need to get the support of the audience we should have had in the first place.

I'm still gobsmacked and so is the state Labour office that we outpolled them in Paradise Point even after they did a recount to check the numbers. That IS a big deal and I'll be pushing that point home everytime I get the chance.

Then again who wants to spend time reading the details on an election result when its more fun to stir the cauldron here.::)

[mik01]

Umm am I missing something here.
The issue at this election was not the name of the party, it was the fracture between the two entities. This is the sole reason there is not a senator with a fishing banner.
We don't need to get a wider audience we need to get the support of the audience we should have had in the first place.

I'm still gobsmacked and so is the state Labour office that we outpolled them in Paradise Point even after they did a recount to check the numbers. That IS a big deal and I'll be pushing that point home everytime I get the chance.

Then again who wants to spend time reading the details on an election result when its more fun to stir the cauldron here.::)

agreed.
although, it is sensible to dissect the possibilities and look at how to expand the acceptance of the party.
if we assume there was not 2 parties and the AFLP polled 35000 votes, we would be discussing what needed to be done for the next election to increase that figure. Thats all I see the people here doing - looking to make things better.

what about The Outdoor Lifestyle Party? and a focus on all outdoor activities - people enjoying the outdoors sensibly and sustainably - only the hardcore greenies could find an issue with that...

[Chris Ryan]

Would it not be better to convert more of those that understand the situation rather than convert those that don't know/care about the outdoor vote?

There are 200,000 registered boat owners in QLD and the fishing vote gained almost 20% of these people. Imagine if 50% of them came on board - 100,000 votes would smash the results. We have already seen an increase in exposure to the 4WD fraterinity (300,000 registered 4WD owners too!) so the direction change to "Lifestyle" is working - albeit slowly. Its just exposure, promotion and commitment which is needed over anything else in IMO.

Chris

[DR]

to expand to include others, i still think fishing should go, it pigeon holes the whole party. many years ago we were forced to join a union to work on specific sites.. 'the painters & decorators union' we used to be able to get around it, sort of, by saying we did not have a union. To get our fees a name change was had 'the Painters, Decorators & signwriters Union' was formed..whoopee, great.. until someone went to a meeting & asked a question, they knew nothing of our trade, told the fella to basically 'sit down & shut up we don't even recognise you people'...can this have a similar effect on the thing of other 'outdoor' activities whose vote we intend to try & gain????

[Chris Ryan]

I see your point DR, but this last election was the first step into other areas seeing as the heritage of the party was always just fishing so it has really only had 6 months in play so it is a bit hard to ascertain yet the reception it will receive longer term.

I can't ever see how having the lifestlye component of our name nor the people involved ever say "we don't recognise you lot". The party is there welcoming all outdoors pursuits - fishing, boating, camping, 4wding, shooting etc. I liken a big change to that seen in AFL - the move to Sydney from Sth Melb with the Swans and to Brisbane from Fitzroy took a long time for the teams to cement themselves, get the personelle and they did eventually get successful. We have made that big change, we have got some great people now we just need to work super hard to get that success.

So maybe some 'tweaks' to the positioning statements and marketing plans to be be made, however at the end of the day you can be called the "We love the Environment and low taxes with cheap petrol and a 3 day working week" party, yeah you will get votes, but will people take them seriously even though the name suggests that all their dreams come true with them? Probably bloody would now I said that :)

More than likely we will then get the "we love the Environment and low taxes with cheap petrol and a 3 day working week too" party running at the same time and all get stripped away.

Chris

[Burley_Boy]

The point that may be missed in my statement Mok01 is that I'm not talking about the 35000 votes either that went the fishing fraternity way this election. I'm talking about the same contingent that Chris has brought up. Every person in ten that stopped to talk to you because you represented fishing.

There were plenty of people put off supporting and helping the fishing vote at this election due to the obvious rift. This makes all the difference in the world. That the fishing & camping interest was a drawcard was evident to anyone manning a booth. Those are the votes we need to win as its where you spend minimum effort for maximum gain. I believe a unified front will gain the support.

Spending time building up this message at a grass roots level will mean the difference between 99% of people at a booth not knowing there was a party to represent their vote and that there is a serious option that will not impinge on their choice of government. If the party is unable to gain grassroots support from the main interest contingent which obviously is fishing, at least in SE QLD, then I can't see how a namechange will suddenly gain this vote. Without the fishing vote this party is toast, simple as that.

[Horse]

There are 200,000 registered boat owners in QLD and the fishing vote gained almost 20% of these people. Imagine if 50% of them came on board - 100,000 votes would smash the results. We have already seen an increase in exposure to the 4WD fraterinity (300,000 registered 4WD owners too!) so the direction change to "Lifestyle" is working - albeit slowly. Its just exposure, promotion and commitment which is needed over anything else in IMO.

Chris

Chris, I think you are drawing a very long bow with some of your assumptions about who votes for the ALFP. Was it the 20% of boat owners, 15% of the 4X ownersor only 2% of the people who went fishing last year who supported the parties.

I see no evidence that the "lifestyle" addition had anything other than a negative impact on voting trends. ALFP had eight times the booth workers, a much greater access to promotional channels, significantly higher industry support, local candidates and the moral high ground but could barely outpoll a couple of mexicans running for the Fishing Party. My wife reads "Lifestyle" magazines and they certainly don't have fishing articles. They are concerned with fashion, home renovations and how to make christmas decorations out of recycled pie dishes.

Unfortunately TFP has the prime position in the branding stakes and if KC and crew had been able to keep control of the QLD chapter then I feel that they would have had a much stronger response overall from the voting public.

It's time to move forward now but we must be sure of the direction.

[craftycarp]

A new name with no fishing in it can have more appeal than tfpq ever could and then TFP cant spoil it. We have 3-4 years to work on it. A more eco friendly looking lifestyle party is the only way to go. I will not be voting for any party with fishing in the name in the future. It is a waste of a vote.

[Derek Bullock]

A new name with no fishing in it can have more appeal than tfpq ever could and then TFP cant spoil it. We have 3-4 years to work on it. A more eco friendly looking lifestyle party is the only way to go. I will not be voting for any party with fishing in the name in the future. It is a waste of a vote.

Crafty

If the Executive of the AFLP decide that they are going to pursue the original goals that they had before the election then I believe they need to show the voters who they are and what they are about before people can say they will never vote for them again.

Just remember TFP is practically finished in Qld already. They now have no party branch and no real executive. Thats not saying they may try and reform when the court case is over. However from looking at KC's documents thats highly unlikely.

What the voters need to see is good common sense policies and good common sense actions by AFLP. The average person doesn't want to see, neither are they interested in the fanatical approach.

I think also that things would improve significantly if AFLP would stop bashing the Greens. The Greens are seen by the average person as being the people saving the planet, thats why they attract such a big vote and to continually develop an approach to stop the Greens is disastrous in my view. Remember they currently have 5 Senators whereas fishing has none. What the AFLP needs to do is beat the Greens at their own game by presenting good policies on the environment. Let the people know that AFLP are the good guys not a bunch of fanatics setting out to destroy the Greens. Look at all the promotional stuff from this election from the AFLP ~ It was Green bashing. Even KC's letter just placed on the AFLP website is Green bashing. I personally believe that the advisors to AFLP have got it wrong on that one.

One thing I think that everyone needs to take heed of is that from hereon in there will always be Green Zones in Marine Parks regardless of what the general public believe and want. It's political, it's supported by the United Nations and also supported by numerous countries around the world.

What we should be looking at is minimising the effect Green Zones have on the general public and what I believe is needed to be adopted in that regard is a process like the MBAA have started, and thats the presentation of scientific facts together with representation across all the stakeholders in regards fishing both recreational and professional that minimises disruption and ensures a sustainable future for all.

As I heard Antony Green say on the ABC last Saturday night so many times ~ "It's to early to make a call on this one".


Derek

[disorderly]

Crafty



I think also that things would improve significantly if AFLP would stop bashing the Greens. The Greens are seen by the average person as being the people saving the planet, thats why they attract such a big vote and to continually develop an approach to stop the Greens is disastrous in my view. Remember they currently have 5 Senators whereas fishing has none. What the AFLP needs to do is beat the Greens at their own game by presenting good policies on the environment. Let the people know that AFLP are the good guys not a bunch of fanatics setting out to destroy the Greens. Look at all the promotional stuff from this election from the AFLP ~ It was Green bashing. Even KC's letter just placed on the AFLP website is Green bashing. I personally believe that the advisors to AFLP have got it wrong on that one.

One thing I think that everyone needs to take heed of is that from hereon in there will always be Green Zones in Marine Parks regardless of what the general public believe and want. It's political, it's supported by the United Nations and also supported by numerous countries around the world.



Derek

This is what I alluded to in my previous post .
At the moment we seem to have a distinct "us verses them" mentality .
Unfortunately there are and will always be a lot more of "them".
We need to bridge the gap somewhat and try and find some common ground with the greens and thinking people that doesn't involve locking up vast areas of the oceans and forests.
I realize that this is a difficult assignment when dealing with fanatics(but we are also in our own way)so as Derek states we need to form and present good sustainable policies to minimize environmental damage that also allow us to enjoy our recreational activities.

Scott

[Fafnir]

Policies along the lines of getting in first with the phasing out of lead sinkers/jigheads in dams that supply drinking water?

Like kicking up about pumping tonnes of sand out of the bay to build a new runway?

Making a fuss about the amount of polution that really damages the biodiversity of moreton bay?

I'd be all for that, regardless of the name of the party.

[Adamy]

Crafty

I think also that things would improve significantly if AFLP would stop bashing the Greens. The Greens are seen by the average person as being the people saving the planet, thats why they attract such a big vote and to continually develop an approach to stop the Greens is disastrous in my view. Remember they currently have 5 Senators whereas fishing has none. What the AFLP needs to do is beat the Greens at their own game by presenting good policies on the environment. Let the people know that AFLP are the good guys not a bunch of fanatics setting out to destroy the Greens. Look at all the promotional stuff from this election from the AFLP ~ It was Green bashing. Even KC's letter just placed on the AFLP website is Green bashing. I personally believe that the advisors to AFLP have got it wrong on that one.

Derek

I cant believe I'm about to say this: I agree with Derek! (:oGasp horror and shame!!!;D)

Certain insiders within the party know that I have been advocating an "ultra green" approach for a little while now. We dont need to "bash" the greens what we need to do is beat them at their own game. Like Fafir has mentioned kick up a stink about sand dredging, pollution outfalls and siltation within the bay. We need to talk about the problems of overpopulation and how to manage population growth such that it doesnt have an adverse effect on the environment.

All this happens way "upstream" before it ever enters the bay. If we fix the quality of our upstream water systems then the bay will be healthier as a result and more fish for everyone.

We have to take the emphasis off using close out tactics (green zones) to "fix" the problems and address the real problems - If we do this then we dont have to "bash" the Greens, they are simply exposed for what they are, they cant claim to want to fix the bay, when all they are doing is stopping a few guys from having a fish.

Anyway, the big problem is HOW to get this message across? In our experience you cant just send the CM and all the other media a press release, they wont carry the story. We know we have sent literally hundreds of press releases (and some very green ones) for very little return.

My feeling is we need action for make them sit up and take notice, Like Fishos protesting for MORE protection of the bay (not closeouts but REAL protection - like from the REAL issues). A blockaide or flotilla on the river, or boat drivepast of Parliament to stop fishing closures is one thing and makes us look selfish.

But the same movement in aide of a real "campaign" like drawing attention to the real issues is something different, but still needs to be linked to no closeouts so that the pollies get the message.

Anyway, I like many others would certainly be very supportive of such a move.

Adam

[Jackinthebox]

"I see no evidence that the "lifestyle" addition had anything other than a negative impact on voting trends. ALFP had eight times the booth workers, a much greater access to promotional channels, significantly higher industry support, local candidates and the moral high ground but could barely outpoll a couple of mexicans running for the Fishing Party. "

I still reckon The Fishing Party got the votes they did because people voted for them by accident, they appeared first on the ticket and that's what the "Fishing vote" voted for. I have spoken to quite a few people now who meant to vote for AFLP but voted for "The Fishing Party" by mistake because they saw it first and just stuck a "1" in the box & got the hell out of there!


By the way, every single bloke that I watched turn up in a big offroad 4WD that gets used "properly" and not just by mum & the kids or as a "Toorak Tractor", couldn't have cared less about me standing there with my big sign saying we were fighting for their 4wd access rights, etc, etc. Our slogan even has a big 4wd right there and they weren't interested.

Mick

[Fafnir]

I think your 'action' slant is spot on the money. It is media worthy. And as Adam says, it shows the Greens motivation for what it is, simply banning fishing. Where as we conservationists are interested in really making a difference.

Just out of interest, with all these press releases that were sent, who exactly were they sent to? What relationships had already been developed with that individual? Having previously worked in a newspaper, as well as writing many press releases that did see the light of day, my experience has been the best way to get things published is to have a reasonable relationship with the relevant journalist in the first place. Being friendly with the editor is even better, but harder to achieve. It's always worthwhile to try and meet with them in person and develop a relationship if you intend on sending them a number of press releases over a period of time.

Most journo's that I know are required to write a certain number of column centimeters of text each week. Supplying them with copy that is a) newsworthy and b) written in the style of the paper, so it needs little editing, is very appealing to many journalists. Saves them work. All the better if there is a photo opportunity or, if possible, a photo is supplied that they can simply run with.

[Adamy]

I think your 'action' slant is spot on the money. It is media worthy. And as Adam says, it shows the Greens motivation for what it is, simply banning fishing. Where as we conservationists are interested in really making a difference.

Just out of interest, with all these press releases that were sent, who exactly were they sent to? What relationships had already been developed with that individual? Having previously worked in a newspaper, as well as writing many press releases that did see the light of day, my experience has been the best way to get things published is to have a reasonable relationship with the relevant journalist in the first place. Being friendly with the editor is even better, but harder to achieve. It's always worthwhile to try and meet with them in person and develop a relationship if you intend on sending them a number of press releases over a period of time.

Most journo's that I know are required to write a certain number of column centimeters of text each week. Supplying them with copy that is a) newsworthy and b) written in the style of the paper, so it needs little editing, is very appealing to many journalists. Saves them work. All the better if there is a photo opportunity or, if possible, a photo is supplied that they can simply run with.

Relevant thoughts Fafnir!! There was a list, about 400 media strong that press releases were sent to - your point about the relationship is extremely important and severely lacking.

What we need is an experienced press manager.... better shut your mouth now or else you might get recruited:P.

Sounds like a joke - but ask Chris Ryan if I joke about stuff like this - if you're serious, then you're more than welcome aboard!! We need all the help we can get! Pm me or Chris Ryan. That goes for anyone who feels they would like to contribute to make a better party for the future.

Adam.

p.s - YES! I have resigned from the party- but happy to help till I start the new job.

[Chris Ryan]

Hey guys,

I am hearing loud and clear about what you are saying and I am appreciative of the feedback. I will take it back to the Executive for discussion. Adam and I were of the get closer to the green mentality hoping to take a step or two closer the environment angle and I personally want to go that way but the party decisions are made on a majority vote.

One thing that that is the hardest thing to solve is resources. There are exactly 4 Executive Members, the 2 candidates, 1 advisor - that's it. More than happy to talk to anyone about participating further and get involved and help make a difference for the future but as you can see by the core group it is impossible to be everywhere at once and get all things done in the same way as the larger parties with their hordes of paid staff do.

Chris

[Burley_Boy]

Should not write too much late at night.. too much of the you know what but what the hell.
Derek I get your point and yes I think there is value in promoting green yet sensible. It was quite in your face though how anti the greens some people were at my booth. I mean it was seriously polarised. If someone grabbed a greens flyer i would not bother and if they scorned them they were mine.. NOT saying you're wrong at all dude (even though you play with camp ovens ...(just kiddin)). Seriously it was just the response I had. I was surprised by the serious anti green sentiment I found.

Chris, resources is the key. Lets work on getting the grass roots supprt that actually are prepared to do the work. I know its hard. My wife is the secretary of the local P&C and that means the working bee for a 900+ pupil school ...and that means... me and the neighbour (whose wife is also in the P&C) sanding 70+ school seats for painting today.
Damn hard to get people to help out these days and its the same line given to me by the Libs at my booth.
Lets keep working at it. All support is required guys to get this working effectively.

[disorderly]

Policies along the lines of getting in first with the phasing out of lead sinkers/jigheads in dams that supply drinking water?

Like kicking up about pumping tonnes of sand out of the bay to build a new runway?

Making a fuss about the amount of polution that really damages the biodiversity of moreton bay?

I'd be all for that, regardless of the name of the party.

All these things are great but just dont forget that there are many constituents north of brisvegas.
We have already been shafted up here with green zones and reduced fish quota's and now it looks like it's your turn.
But we are yet to see the currently happening inshore fishery plan where we are and what the ramifications will be on the existing fin fish and other tidal fish reg's and what the further limitations may be.

scott

[Fafnir]

Clearly Scott I have left out everything happening up North because of a lack of personal knowledge. That's where local knowledge would be needed in all areas to identify issues that the party could get behind. There could be some very media worthy issues unearthed.

[disorderly]

Clearly Scott I have left out everything happening up North because of a lack of personal knowledge. That's where local knowledge would be needed in all areas to identify issues that the party could get behind. There could be some very media worthy issues unearthed.

Of course mate and that probably was why we were shafted up here in the first place.
Because most of the population lives in the south-east corner and were unaware /didnt care what happened up here.
However now the precedent has been set and you guys are going to feel the full brunt of the environmental tidal wave that will exclude you from area's that you previously fished.

Scott

[webby]

Being on the Mac committee, we did the final draft on the New Proposed inshore Finfish, some months ago.
Was hoping the RIS would have been out before Xmas, but there seems to be some delay, wether the elections had something to do with or it has been delayed by political reasons i cannot get any information out of DPI.
Will keep you all posted when i do.
regards

[flick]

My work sees me out and about and chatting with a very wide range of voters. In conversation leading up to the election every single person who said they would probably vote green, said it was due to lack of political knowledge and they believe the greens do a great job of taking care of the environment.

A large percentage of green voters don't vote green due to ideologies, but because they don't trust or understand the major parties. This is predominantly young voters who didn't grow up in political savvy households, or really don't care that much.

I believe this means a large percentage of the green vote is for an eco friendly party, not the "GREENS" as they currently exist.

This should be an easy demographic to target if our party is sold as 'conservation, enviro, eco sustainability'. The greens do it by simply saying, don't vote liberal/ labor, we actually care about stuff.

Jim

[craftycarp]

Another problem is that a lot of fishermen are also shooters and so will vote for the Shooters Party. Perhaps the AFLP and Shooters Party need to run a joint ticket to avoid splitting the vote there as well.
Rofl you are a classic. Yeah ALOT of fisherman are also shooters. Here we are talking about lifestyle party that will steel votes from the greens and you want us to align with the shooters. I think you are on the wrong website.

[John L]

Craftycarp,

I was under the impression that is what the AFLP and Shooters Party did in NSW.

[John L]

On the numbers of shooters who are fishermen or visa versa. I can only go on the members of my local SSAA and other shooters not club connected that I know. In our SSAA at least 40% are keen fishermen with a lot in the local fishing club as well. Our current SSAA club president is a past executive member of the local fishing club.

I would say another 20% are holiday fishermen. Of course if Craftycarp feels that the AFLP don't want or need these crossover votes or preferences I can pass this on to them on his behalf.

[Chris Ryan]

Hi John,

The AFLP and the ASP did do a joint ticket in NSW, and in QLD and SA we had a preference agreement in place as the executive of the AFLP, in our complete outdoor lifestyle focus saw, as you outlined, that and enormous number of recreational fisherman are shooters and also own 4wd's. It was a good fit between the parties and we are thankful for the support we received by the ASP in the election.

Chris

[craftycarp]

What ever this debate is pointless. Too many Hill Billies here. No wonder the Greens have it all over us. Even the shooters should be trying to hide behind a "lifestyle" that doesn't explicitly mention shooting. The greens will always beat us if we are trying to be shooters/fishers first. Good luck to you all.

[NEWBY]

Winnig as a minoriy is easy. EG if you want 10% of the GBR back ask for the bloody lot.
Look at the Greens. They ask for 100% and get 15%. Which is probably the start they wanted anyway and then they chip away asking for the rest, being 90% and they get another 5 or 10% etc etc. Go for gold and temporarily accept bronze. Smart move.