Queensland Premier Anna Bligh wants to spend a few million dollars of taxpayers' money on a public-relations blitz, including a letter to every Queensland household (Courier Mail 16/9).

I heard a lot of comments about this on the radio yesterday from people stopped in the street. Not one of them likes the idea of a mass mail-out. No one said that they would even read a letter of that sort, regardless of the subject matter.

So then, how does the government (the Qld Govt or any govt) get its message out there?

How does it reach the people? How does it promote a cause without being seen to promote itself?

Another common comment was that the government is not listening to the people. People feel powerless and alienated. They feel as thought their government is not acting in their best interests.

So how does a government get a message across that is accepted as genuine and not perceived as biased or spun in a misleading manner?

Is it even possible for any government to be accepted by the majority of its consitituents as being straight with the people and always acting in the best interests of the people?

Or is every government doomed to fall out of favour and incur a whole lot of distrust, no matter how it conducts its business?

If our Anna wants to be accepted as doing a good job, & actually handling OUR money, in a reasonable manner, she could stary by getting rid of the quarter or so of public servants, who do nothing but promote the government.

She should start with at least a hundred or so from the premiers department. If the much despised old Joh could manage with 6 staff, surely, even someone as incompete as Anna, should be able to do it with 60 or so.

This woman is a fool, & her government members are a bunch of fools. I am surprised that many of the ministers are allowed on TV, where their lack of any simple savvy shines brightly, for all to see.

Of course they do have that idiot Swan, to model themselves on.

Ludwig

So then, how does the government (the Qld Govt or any govt) get its message out there?

Firstly I would suggest it doesn't run an election campaign based on lies.

Secondly, represent the interests of the people they claim to represent.

Thirdly, don't piss our tax dollars against the wall, time nad time again.

You gain respect by being a firm but fair leader, either in politics or in the workplace.

When you simply sell the family (tax payers) assetts to make up for the terrible mess you have created, the family gets a tad snakey. It's a bit like kids watching their inheritences dissapearing and being powerless to do anything about it.

May not have been so hard to take if the election was not won on lies and scare tactics.

Is it even possible for any government to be accepted by the majority of its consitituents as being straight with the people and always acting in the best interests of the people?
When you have the likes of beaty who suddenly walks, then nuttel with his wrong doings, followed closely by anna lies, I doubt it!

Hasbeen; If the much despised old Joh could manage with 6 staff, surely, even someone as incompete as Anna, should be able to do it with 60 or so.

Good point. And there were very few computers etc in Johs days and email was something from 'the jetsons' not to mention mobile phones and lap tops.

I think there might be mutiny on the good ship bounty this time around.

Ludwig
I think the root the problem is the party system.

One side gets in by a comparatively large margin (3-7%) and behaves like it's born the rule. Constantly telling us how good they are and how bad the opposition is.

The other side, spends most of it's time white anting anything good the government tries to do. Concentrates on the trivialities in order to make them selves seem less odious.

Alternative policies? are merely 'emperors new clothes' to re-marketing the same tired ideology.

It long since stopped being about what is best for the people. Its like two (obsolete) sterile mammoths fighting over an irrelevant mating mound. Neither will make much difference where it counts. Our interests get trampled like the grass under their feet.

Hasbeen,
Feel better now?
Perhaps you should research what the Premiers Department actually does obviously you have no idea.
There is a big difference between the Premiers Department and her Office.
What amazes me is that you think the other lot would be any different.
Certainly where eAnt is their LNP local member is a hypercritical, out of his depth individual with more ambition than talent and delusions of grandeur.

Examinator, I find it truly amazing that anyone can think they know so much, & show just how little they do know, every time they touch a computer. You wouldn't be a member of her lot, would you?

Come to think of it, that's par for the course, with dills. Have you ever thought of getting a job as a presenter, with the ABC? Most of your posts sound like the rubbish they spout.

Given time, you may grow up, but it's most unlikely, in just a life time or two.

Yes we do know what it does, & what it doesn't. That's why we want to see it back to something usefull, to us. You know us, the ones who foot the bill.

How convenient, some can not remember John Howard's letters, his fridge magnets and unwanted phone messages.
Balance please.

Like Howard, Anna Bligh's Achilles Heel is her hubris. Unlike John Howard she has very little ability or ideas to offer (well I might not have agreed with Howard but he knew where he was going). Remove the affirmative action and there is nothing left.

More spin didn't help Howard and it will not help Bligh either. The Labor government in Qld will manage to recruit good people for the opposition if Anna doesn't quit soon. She knows it too, hence her recent push for affirmative action for company boards, in fact anywhere she could land a job. Maybe the remnants of ABC Learning after liberal Sallyanne Atkinson? Will she be Qld's next tourism 'diplomat' for somewhere sweet overseas? There has just got to be a guvvy funded sinecure somewhere over there.

I have asked a bunch of questions that I don't know the answers to. Nor can I even offer some reasonable potential answers, except for the last question

My last question was:

'Or is every government doomed to fall out of favour and incur a whole lot of distrust, no matter how it conducts its business?'

The answer seems to be yes!

There doesn't seem to be one single federal or state government that has escaped this syndrome over the last thirty years that I've been politicially aware.

Even Rudd, with his still enormous public support according to the polls, isn't escaping a whole lot of condemnation.....not least from me. I think he is the worst PM we've ever had, for reasons that I have explained on other threads on OLO.

And now I just simply don't know what else to say !! !! !! !! (:>0

Apologies Ludwig

>”........ the government is not listening to the people. People feel powerless and alienated. They feel as thought their government is not acting in their best interests.”<

Organisational theory and practice dictates that the hierarchy of purposes in any organisation is as follows.
1.Its own survival/growth
2.The survival of those in power
3.Their personal interests. (Marlow's Hierarchy of needs.)
4.Then those they purport to serve.(us...voters, customers etc.)
Given that our interests come after the above list then it isn't that surprising that people are feeling a little second hand.
In business the solution is half truth spin ads ' whiter than white' etc.
Therefore it shouldn't be a surprise to find that govts. Regardless of the flavour, seek to use the same proven tactics of manipulation via the media.
If we overlay this voters come 4th with that of parties i.e. another set of organisations the list looks like this.
1.Part first
2.survival in party
3.personal interests within the party
4.gaining govt for the party
5.survival in the government power structure staying a minister etc
6.personal advancement to a minister (Maslow again)
7.maintaining perks
8.The policy
9.The ( people) voters.
NB few of these goals are based on real executive ability of running the country (acid test). They're advancement is more based on ambition and internal prowess not the former. In that is adherence to the ideology that defines the party.

I used one member I know/knew well a painter by trade and not the best informed individual.. his utterances in the press have in the past been roundly ridiculed for their inanity. His hypocrite alliance with his church is a wonder to observe. It should be noted that despite being well funded by self serving developers (disproportionate influence for the number of voters) his last three elections were through decreasing numbers one of the most marginal seats in parliament. He now advertised himself by his party affiliation on his front window of his electorate office. Get the alienation/self interest...people last.

Hasbeen,
Wrong again. I said "Neither will make much difference where it counts. Our interests get trampled like the grass under their feet." what part of that don't you understand.

You're the one that makes grand sweeping statements then refuses/unable to defend them instead delves into obfuscatory personal attacks not me.

Well, if we needed any convincing, our Anna, has just a appeared on TV, talking about this idiot, caught high level drink driving in a tax payer funded car.

So what did Anna have to say about this idiot.

She said that our drunken public servant was, wait for it, "a very bright young woman".

No wonder Qld is in trouble. This fool woman has a very strange idea of what we might consider bright.

I'll bet she was a great twister of fact. Just what you need in a spin doctor.

How about a guessing game. On what date will this idiot be quietly rehabilitated, into the fold?

Belly, you become tiresome some times. What JH did has nothing to do with Anna failing.

I believe Howard did some very good things for Oz. However he did some stupid things too.

Are you listening mate? I agree with you, his Industrial Relations policy was a major mistake, & the government deserved to fall because of it.

Pity we didn't have anyone good, to replace him, in either party, & STILL DON"T. We are about to send the only good one, we could have had, to the USA.

This woman is a fool, & her government members are a bunch of fools. I am surprised that many of the ministers are allowed on TV, where their lack of any simple savvy shines brightly, for all to see.
Hasbeen, unfortunately you're hitting the nail on the head there. I am at a loss how these people got support to get into government but then again, just look at the average constituent. Do we give up now or hang in till sense makes a re-appearance.

How convenient, some can not remember John Howard's letters, his fridge magnets and unwanted phone messages. Balance please.
Ah Belly, that makes it alright then ?

I think you all know my Christian roots and the propensity of some to prophesy, but I am going to make a prophesy, that we will see either come true or be proved false. My prophesy is that before Kevin Rudd goes to the polls again, his government is going to run all State governments up the crush, as we used to say in the cattle industry, and clip their powers back, enormously.

They are currently a burden on society generally, and Bligh and her lot are just one of the four on the East Coats, and underbelly, with one on the West Coast, run by the other lot, that are going to be jerked back into reality. Forty years ago, a major shift in power occurred in New South Wales and all real power shifted from the people to the legal profession. This shift was illegal but it has continued for forty years, with all the States eventually following suit. It depended on a lie, and that lie is the concept of State Sovereignty.

I happen to believe that State Sovereignty is a complete abomination, and as a student of law, an absolute and illegal alternative to a belief in either Almighty God or the Rule of Law. I am a fan of Lionel Murphy. Lionel was an atheist, an industrial chemist before he studied law, did a stint as Attorney General, and ended up on the High Court where he died of cancer at 62 years old. However Lionel understood that you had to have a Rule of Law and only one Top Dog. That Top Dog is the Commonwealth. In a country of only 21 million, we don’t need States anymore. They are inefficient, expensive, useless, and costly, and Kevin Rudd has the tools in his garden shed, to create the greatest stimulus package the country has seen since 1900, by curbing State power.

I do not think it matters how much Blah Blah Bligh pumps out. The Mutiny on the Bounty is about to be repeated in Queensland, and Fletcher Christian Rudd’s government, will take charge

Xammy, I agree with your list of priorities. But they aren't mutually exclusive. If our system worked as it was supposed to, then our pollies would have to concentrate on your point 4 in order to achieve point 1. They'd go hand in hand, perfectly.

Even with our somewhat corrupted system, they are still pretty closely related.....aren't they?

But then we have the problem that what the majority of the people want is not always the best course of action. This is particualrly true right now, in a time where the pursuance of a sustainability paradigm is of the utmost importance, but is not of the utmost importance in the minds of most voters.

So it leaves governments in a very difficult position - of striving to maximise their direct appeal to the populace and be seen to do what the people want as far as they can, or to lead and take the hard decisions, promote them vehemently and hope like buggery that the people come around to see the merit of it all without condemning them for using taxpayers' money to promote said policies.....or some combination of the two.

When an enormous degree of inherent mistrust for politicians is factored in to this mix, the whole business of governing becomes just about impossible, without a massive dischord developing between the governers and the governees.

There is another major problem - just about any government that is elected is elected on the basis of being the lesser of two evils. It is a case of the other mob losing, not of them winning. So right from the start they don't have much genuine support.... and don't have mandate to do a bloody thing!

So how on earth do we get around this and engender a healthy relationship between governments and constituents?

Ludwig,
Fair point particularly the governments losing rather than winning in most cases.
The perversion dynamic you missed is the swing seat power and swing voter.

In reality parties strategize on the basis of swing voters in and swing seats . They rightly assume there are a rump of voters on both sides that they are never going to to win over the opposition's so they concentrate on on the swing-set.
Howard got the demographics wrong confused his ideology/legacy with what the swing-set wanted. Hence government (seats) change on 3-8 % on average.

Wannabes need to capture their seat % and not upset their base . One seat in Qld the decider was was self gratifying interest V scientific and common sense (the bay and increased inheritance.).
This is one reason 3rd parties tend to be more policy conscious.

At the base of all this are emotional advertising focusing on the trivial 'sensation' ...Note the importance of the Silly ACTIONS of a PS in this topic. One could ask where is the relevance to the topic...Labor are the enemy (prejudice).
NB the presidential style of elections based on public personality rather than substance or ability as in forward thinking. Howard survived by playing on fears and pork barrelling, and steady as she goes even though evidence was mounting against this i.e. AGW.
Now we have Labor power structures and negative perspectives...not for the party to lose we have massive watering down of policies.

With such small margins to play with Govts/ parties are reticent to offend ...the result is policy sclerosis, glacial change and relative party effective interchangeability.

While raising the public level of information and though is in the long run clearly the best solution. In the short run they would be picked off by the conditioned public's short attention span.

I think that factual no party/ personality spin advertising would help but then again policy is second to gaining/holding party power.