The state newsagent associations in New South Wales and Queensland have written to the national ANF with a proposal aimed at resolving the current disunity which is weakening newsagent representation to suppliers and government.
Both sides have faults and both sides need to give some so that newsagents, the only stakeholders who matter in this bitter dispute, benefit from robust, independent and transparent representation.
As I understand it, the ANF has not yet responded to the letter which was sent almost three weeks ago.
I have read the letter several times and i still shake my head in dismay. NANA & The QNF deserve to be told to go jump. Whilst some of the content of the letter raises valuable discussion points, you cannot demand that The ANF MUST adhere to all points listed by the 23rd of February, considering it was only written on the 31st of January. Further to this, if both State Associations are not about “rehashing history…..or finger pointing”, why does the majority of content of this letter contain such? To state that the ANF CEO’s resignation was “manipulated” is an absolute disgrace.
It is about time the State Associations in Queensland & NSW gave THEIR MEMBERS the opportunity to speak. Dissolve all board positions and allow Newsagents the decision on where they think their future lies.
Vaughan, Debate is healthy as is transparency. That the states are seeking to engage with the ANF is good. What both sides do is, of course, up to them. Unfortunately, the ANF strategy must cause QNF and NANA to close and this will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars of newsagent funds. Further, it begs the question about Victoria – maybe what is good for NSW and QLD is good for Victoria. Mark
Mark,
Debate is healthy, i agree. The letter that was sent to the ANF was hardly asking for a debate on the issues,it was demanding that the ANF comepletely adhere to QNF and NANA’s demands by a specific date or they would immediately form an alternate industry body. I think that the majority of Newsagents would see this as a waste of membership funds and not proactive to reaching a collective solution.
Vaughan
If the alternative was that they head off and do that then the letter at least opens the door. As things stand right now, the unity heralded last year is in tatters so anything which seeks to get the groups to a table to talk has to be good.
Vaughan if you are of the opinion that NANA and QNF are not reacting to calls from their members, i think you are very much mistaken.
Both sides, as Mark says, have faults. But faults are found in any organisation, it is just life.
The MOUs were, in my opinion, doomed to fail from their begining. We have all leart from the mistakes made here but it seem that the ANF have not sought to correct these. In contrast, NANA and QNF have, though their latest actions, acted to start DOING THEIR JOB.
Yes they have layed down strong demands. Yes they have subtly threatened ANF with an alternative national body. But lets look at this in its context.
QNF and NANA needed to do something to address the major issues facing the inudustry, and we know that the ANF has no intention of addressing some of these for many reasons. If not demand such things of the ANF then what … sit back and wait … or settle for a substandard pitiful excuse of a national body … I DONT THINK SO.
NANA and QNF have done what needed to be done. And newsagents are the ones who will benifit from it.
Note there is a poll on the issue here.