It seems that newsagency industry politics is about to get messier with a new split emerging between the ANF, QNF ,NANA and VANA. All four newsagent associations were actively talking behind closed doors. It appeared progress was being made. As the ANF advised newsagents Wednesday, a presentation was made on May 13. This presentation to the ANF, lead by VANA, was based on a document prepared by VANA – The Way Forward 2009. Click here for a copy of this document.
While convoluted and unclear, the document was presented to the ANF as a starting point by VANA, NANA and QNF. The three state associations has reached broad agreement on key elements of the document.
Following the presentation, the ANF undertook to consider the proposal including that ANF Board to resigns and the handing back by the ANF of newsagent members to state associations. These two points are an agreed requirement of VANA, NANA and QNF. I have been told this by several people including someone close to the preparation of the document.
My understanding is that if the ANF agreed to these two key points, the states were set to agree and much sought political unity for newsagents would be a big step closer.
The bulletin published by the ANF Wednesday indicates, from my understanding, that agreement on moving forward has not been achieved. It has been put to me by people involved that the ANF statement does not present all of the facts.
Newsagents want transparent and honest representation on issues that matter to them. I don’t think they want spin. Nor do I think they want representation mixed up with commercial activity as this clouds judgement on representation issues.
I would be very interested to know how this ‘confidential’ document has made its way into the public domain.
The document was presented to the Associatons, including The ANF, as a confidential document.
If someone attached to an Association has got their nose out of joint as a result, and is not prepared to follow confidential guidelines, then they should resign.
If an Association board has knowledge of this release, then the board should resign, they are not serving their members. There seem to be too many people attached to the Associations that are putting themselves first, instead of putting all newsagents first. The release of this document is proof of that.
Whether the document is right or wrong is not the issue, its the confidential process that should have been followed.
Vana have a right to be furious over this breach of confidentiality, no two ways about it.
I do not believe that this document should have been released without the consent of VANA.
Mark, whilst i respect your passion for our industry, I am dissappointed that you have chosen to release this document; I need to understand what benefit is being achieved, when clearly the process of confidentiality has been breached by someone.
Regarding the Bulliten release by The ANF, I am sure their are valid reasons why / if they are not releasing all the facts.
Vaughan Lawrence
newsxpress Seymour.
newsxpress Beechworth.
Vaughan, The ANF made mention of the document. By sharing what I have newsagents can be mroe informed. Newsagents are the beneficiaries or otherwise of unity and ought to be part of the process and consideration as much as possible.
Transparency and honesty is a good reason. The ANF chose to send us (non-members) an email saying negotiations had broken down between the parties, but no other information. Just another piece of correspondence pointing the finger at others for failing to ensure unity within our industry. This kind of business (the blame game) is the precise reason we do not want to join the ANF and why we are hesitant to join the QNF (they had a history of doing the same a long time back, however, they have been much more open and forthcoming with information recently). For as long as there is an ANF and opposing forces within the industry, who deceive and hide, there will be no ‘banner’ of unity amongst newsagents.
major suppliers and distribution companies must be laughing in their boardrooms today, another opportunity to remove the boot from the throat of the industry has once again been snuffed out by ego’s and self interest. shame shame shame ANF
mark, thanks for keeping the information flowing, once the ANF walked away, the deal was null and void, then all newsagents should have been informed as to what transpired, including any confidential material, after all its the newsagents that actually make up the industry, not the inflated ego’s that proport to represent us.
My question still stands in its present form. Who gave the information out, they need to be held accountable?
They do not deserve a position on any Board by releasing such sensitive information.
The document was a draft put together by VANA for further discussion by the States and ANF.
The document would need to be tested legally, which would form part of the discussion process.
Helen, Transparency and Honesty has nothing to do with it in this instance.
I do not believe pointing the finger at The ANF on this issue is warranted; the question needs to asked who released this information, why they released this information, and what are they trying to gain by hijacking the unity process.
Vaughan
Vaughan, Details of the discussions between the ANF and the states have leaved from several sources over the last month.
The two key position points are the same which have been on the table and a challenge for the ANF for four years.
My issue with the ANF in this is that their bulletin earlier this week engaged in spin. This does their case no service.
By publishing the material here I am encouraging discussion. Newsagents need to tell the boards what they want.
Mark;
The issue at hand is the leaking of a sensitive document; a document that had only the best intention for Unity.
Whether the document is the right way forward was to be for open discussion by our elected board members, that is what they are there for.
They are not elected to release sensitive information, not even to newsagents, until the process of Due Diligence is complete. As i stated, the document would have to be tested legally to avoid ACCC involvement.
I feel that whoever released the document needs to be held accountable by newsagents. If it was a board member they need to be sacked immediately.
Just like the document that has now been made public, newsagents deserve to know who gave this information up.
You know my stand regarding correct representation from our elected bodies, i have spoken about it here openly; however there is still a formal process that needs to be followed by those that are elected by newsagents, otherwise we have NO trust moving forward.
Vaughan
I sold my newsagency in March after four years in the industry but I continue to remain a keen observer of this Blog and the yahoo group maily because of this topic … unity.
The lack of fair, robust, credible representation was one of the main reasons I got out of the game. It’s one of the reasons there is no long term future (I’m talking 10years) for newsagencies in Australia.
Big business (Coles, Woolies, Metcash, News Ltd, Fairfax, ACP etc) will continue to get bigger and have more market power in all areas of retail – including the newsagency channel.
A stand-alone single business has absolutely NO power to fight the system. I was threatened in various ways over the years (by Fairfax, Nationwide, ACP, Gotch and NSW Lotteries mainly) even though I was, in the main, a passionate, good paying, compliant newsagent.
The power they have to dictate supply, home delivery, commissions etc is unhealthy.
Unless newsagents get their act togther, the big end of town will continue to squeeze the life out of newsagents – especially smaller, non alligned (franchised) newsagencies.
I said this four years ago after only a few months in the business after attending an ANF roadshow: a fragmented, state based newsagency channel will not work. National representation with a professional board is the only option.
Pharmacists, accountants, engineers, farmers etc all know this
The only trouble with this is:
(i) the current ANF model is a joke
(ii) NANA, QNF and VANA management will do everything possible to protect their jobs – the last things they really want is national representation.
I hope, for all of you, this situation is resolved in the next 12-18 months or many (probably MOST) newsagencies will die the death of a thousand cuts.
Steven Craig
(ex Morpeth Newsagency)
Vaughan,
I read the document carefully and don’t see it as sensitive. Hopefully it helps newsagents understand opportunities and how some were thinking about bringing the channel together.
Vaughan, you are trying to hijack a legitimate argument by
saying someone is to blame for
leaking the document. It is precisely your type of attitude that has stopped us from going
forward. This is not meant to be
a personal attack but the issue is NOT about who leaked the document – it is supposed to be
about US THE NEWSAGENTS.
June,
You are seriously wrong.
Vaughan is spot on with his comments on this site.
There are board members of associations that want to destroy unity and are self serving individuals. I too am disgusted with the leak. It does MATTER that some board member leaked the document.
Vaughan is NOT trying to hijack a legitimate argument, he is able to see that SOME board members are not keen on having everyone sit around a table and discuss unity.
You are an interesting person June. For someone who is not a MEMBER, you have quite alot to say about issues regarding Associations which represent their MEMBERS.
You are entitled to your comments, even though you are off the mark in many instances. US MEMBERS of OUR Associations will decide whether the ANF, VANA, QNF, NANA etc. are serving us correctly. IF you want to influence change June, then BUY a membership and attend meetings.
As far as the breakdown of talks between the Associations, I will say just this. Do not put the blame solely on the foot of the ANF, it takes more than one to tango honey.
Chris
Reservoir
June;
You have completely missed any point to this discussion and i am a little confused when you reference ‘hijacking a legitimate argument’.
There is nothing ‘legitimate’ about what has transpired here today.
If you new me and my passion for unity for the past 7 years you would withdraw your stupid reference to my attitude.
Board members of Associations are elected by newsagents to represent newsagents. CEO’s of those same Associations are employed by those same board members to represent newsagents.
If you think that our representatives leaking confidential documentation is the right thing to do, then I really do fear for the future of our industry.
This document was presented to our boards for discussion. It was CONFIDENTIAL.
Rightly or wrongly; there is a process that must be followed by boards and CEOs with regards to important documentation. That is what constitutions are for.
You also mention that;
“it is supposed to be
about US THE NEWSAGENTS”.
Yes it is about US; so how do you justify standing up for someone in a privilaged position breaching newsagents trust?
As i said, this discussion is not about the content of the document or whether the document is correct; IT IS about the process of confidentiality attached to a position of trust.
I still want the person / persons that released this document held accountable.
Newsagents have a right to know what the purpose of releasing the document serves.
Newsagents have a right to know who is driving a hidden agenda.
Let’s see if anyone has the courage to stand up and explain their actions.
Vaughan Lawrence
newsxpress Seymour
newsxpress Beechworth
Vaughan,
Beautifully put, and I could not agree more on every point you raised.
You are so right when you talk about hidden agendas, and the wider newsagency community needs to know WHO LEAKED THE DOCUMENT.
Have they got the balls and the courage to put their hand up??? I think not, because the wider newsagency network will finally see WHO really has the newsagent at heart and who is a SELF SERVING INDIVIDUAL!
Come on and GIVE YOURSELF UP so we can finally unmask the person who wants to destroy UNITY, and who refuses to put the greater good of our Industry at the forefront of discussions.
Chris
Reservoir
Chris,
When associations claim to suppliers, the ACCC and others to represent all newsagents, all newsagents are entitled to a view whether they are a member or not.
This blog post is not about leaks or who is entitled to publish a view, it is about ecouraging those who say they represent newsagents to be transparent. To criticise another party and not present the full argument disrespects newsagents.
I was on the ANF Board in 2004 and was on the subcommittee charged with negotiating unity between the ANF and the states. I know how close we came to unifying associations. If you want a witch hunt on the role of individuals, start then – or before even.
No individual is trying to block unifying associations. This blog post is not trying to block unification of newsagent associations.
The challenge to unification of newsagent associations begins and ends with association directors for it is only these folks who have had control of the project from the outset years ago and at every meeting on unity since.
The problem for newsagents is that those in control are selective in what they release because they want to control opinion rather than permit free thought.
We are 4,500 businesses. We will disagree. Shooting people who disagree does nothing to encourage useful debate.
The link isn’t opening for me.
Michael I just checked it. The file is big.
Thanks Mark.
You are a lowlife mark. Publishing this highly confidential strategy document will wreck the good work of people far smarter than you. You dont have the intelletuial capacity to understand the doucment and you are doing the work of rweckers by publisihing it here. You are a pathetic scumbag.
David, Wouldn’t a pathetic scumbag be someone claiming to represent the whole channel?
I have intellectual capacity to understand the document and have no idea why it has to be confidential.
We’d be in great hands with you then David,you obviously have a much higher “intelletuial capacity”than Marks “intellectual capacity “
David , stop beating around the bush and tell Mark what you really think about him .lmao
You are a scumbag Fletcher and you know it playing games like this. You published this secert document because you dont want the anf to work. I hope they do take legal action.
David and a newsagent – the document has been published unaltered for newsagents to draw their own conclusions. It speaks for itself. Is it possible you are angry that newsagents, those asked to fund associations, may not like what they read?
Since the ANF apparently decided to not proceed with what VANA, NANA and QNF proposed, I figured that the proposal was dead. There it would have rested had the ANF not raised it in their email earlier this week.
Newsagents have nothing to fear from open debate on the best structure for industry representation.
Newsagents need national representation on policy and lobbying. You only achieve this through strong professional leadership – not through secrecy, bullying and personal politics.
I am always suspicious opf people who don’t identify themselves with their views. It spells cowardice among other weaknesses.
In my opinion the document should not have been confidential in the first place and having been made public “after the non event” I believe it should as Mark suggests be debated. The paper is well intended, a tad disjointed and profoundly engulfed by self interest, howver a good starting point. The ANF Commercial should have been “floated” long ago for those that wish to have shares in it. Only then will the shareholders demand transparency and corporate governance at the highest level so that real profits can be achieved.
Looking at the polarised commentry obiviously the passion in the industry isn’t dead. We are facing unparraelled times and we are looking for blame within a dozen people or groups of people.
The document should not have been published. It is confidential and presented no real insight other than again we face orgainisations that can’t get their crap together. The ANF has been very weak on its latest challanges, SA Advertiser etc.
The board member or members who leaked the information to you Mark are untrustworthy as they knew what the end result would be. It is fuel for your campaign against the ANF. I am sure that you wouldn’t disagree that you are highly biased against this organisation and for some good reason.
What is it going to take to move this industry from a group of mis-guided, hard working individuals to a solid front. Gone are the times that we can sit there and live with the divid and conquer approach from our suppliers. They thrive on the fact that we would rather agru than band together. It is sickening to think that in the past few months our magazine ‘partners’ have done nothing more than ram in as much stock as possible. News limited have made moves to further erode newsagent channel and minor suppliers facing the wall due to slowing of sales.
Who has the balls to call a National forum. I would attend where ever it was held. The 2-3 days would be worth the investment. Yes we have 4000 general managers and it would get bogged down but strong leaders get results. This is long winded, I know, but in an open debate forum we have no choice, be heard or fail.
Brad
Graeme
Yes exactly, a good starting point. From my short time being exposed to this industry I would never of thought the 3 would become “one”. I hope this is not the end of it.
Derek
Brad, you should not assume that a Board member leaked the document or that it came from one person.
I funded organising a meeting of Victorian newsagents last year because of VANA’s inaction and poor advice from the ANF on the Bill Express mess. This meeting was a catalyst for both VANA and the ANF changing their approach.
While I could organise a national forum, it is time for someone else to show that they want strong, transparent and noresagent-focused leadership. If such a meeting was held and well attended, the ANF and others would take notice and change their approach.
Mark I wouldn’t suggest that you organise such a meeting due to past baggage and people’s perception of your involvement. My thoughts on who leaked the document are no different from others who have blogged here. It that assumption is incorrect than so be it. No-one else has put their hand up.
A national forum is now a must and yes I would help arrange such a meeting. As you have stated and others have people leave things up to someone else. But we as newsagents would have to leave politics and baggage at the door.
As you stated Mark if it is well attended and has healthy debate then our representatives would have to take notice and further unity.
Brad
PS Mark I am not attacking what you have done in the past and present I am infact in favour with most of your thought patterns but I also think that as with some ANF, VANA, past QNF directors and such it may pull unity off the tracks.
I am not sure that what I read is good. It is good that there is passion out there for the industry. So What! without action it is just words, the same old words we have all heard before. Witchhunting has always been a source of activity that people who do not want outcomes employ. It’s a bit like an enquiry or a senate productivity commission etc etc. Whilsle blowers have historically been abused and castigated by the general community, yet it is the information produced by the whistleblower that is the inevitable material that takes the problem to the next step. The whistleblower in this case is obviously one in a position of access to information, information so disturbing in the treatment of it he wants the rank and file to “scream” from the tallest newsagency and support their indudtry. Too bad that some of you a missing the point and just want to “blame” somebody so that things can go back to hum drum and destruction at least until the next so called “important” document is leaked.
The core issue at play and the big barrier to so-called unity is: who sits on the Board? This was the barrier in 2004 and it is the barrier today. No meeting is going to address this because it will not have the capaacity to reconsitiute the Board. This can only be done by calling a Special General Meeting or forming another organisation.
Mark no doubt but what is the reality of that happening. Is there now enough support for that process to happen. We have a dozen at best newsagents commenting here and I would guess twice to three times that reading.
We as a group may not care. If there are 3000 active newsagents more than 75% of us are looking inside our four walls. Sure some are in groups and some state bodies are swinging hard but what will it take to shake us from our coma? Others need to comment or let there position known.
As for who sits on a board, it is very clear that we need something new.
This document was the result of hard work by people who care about newsagents. Only a scumbag would publish it, a scumbag with the intelletuial capacity of a child. Go on, have your meeting and waste more time. You get what you deserve. Pathetic idiots.
Brad, There are good associations and good board members. The QNF is growing so QLD newsagents must like what it is doing for them.
David, I failed High School so you have got me there.
David,
It is you that should grow up. There has been enough explaination on this site for someone to “get over it” Move on with your stiad lot that not only won’t co operate but can’t give up their prized imagery of omportance to make this a better industry. Are you one of them? sorry, it appears that you are one of them.
I share this because I think every Newsagent in Australia received one this morning.
ANF sent an application form with my magazine delivery today for membership and some of the benifits of being a member of the ANF this morning.
I am confused to put it bluntly. I cannot join my mind says, my heart wants to join.
Not every newsagent…
And I share your inner conflict.
The best way for the ANF to attraact members is to serve newsagents in an open, transparent and selfless way. The games played out in South Australia over the last two weeks are appalling. I am skeptical of organisations which want to shutdown open discussion.
Round and round the same merry go round we go…again and again. Every year there is the attempt at “unity” and everytime it fails. It seems nothing more than a pipe dream. There is too much baggage across all of the associations to prevent this dream from happening. In my view, either the associations would be best served getting on for delivering for members and not worry about it. There are bigger issues at hand. Honestly, the only way I think it will ever happen is if it is a new entity and has nothing to do with the incarnations of the previous bodies. Even if it did get off the ground, the other associations will probably undermine it. Time is running out, the industry is changing and all the while newsagents are still bickering over who will rule the spoils. It is time for leadership and real policy direction. Unfortunately, I think all of the associations are lacking both.
I really believe we could do something special with VANA.
I wish someone from there would comment (we know they
read it all) and give me some valid reason why we couldn’t stage a “coup” and have national
unity within weeks.
VANA only have to come out and
say why they CAN’T do that and then I’ll shut up. Promise!!!!!!
June, We need to ask QNF/NANA what they propose. Their track record – Bill Express, Modern Award etc – is far better right now.
Mark, I concur. I must say I have always admired your ability to see both sides of an argument and you’re right.
The 3 large states should be thrown down the gauntlet by newsagents that WHOMEVER is
the first to offer nationalism in its
purest form (please, no 10 year
hiaiatus while a new constitution
is formed and reformed)will be
the state we will all follow.
I stand by VANA because no-one
else has shown me anything but
newsagents – demand something – anything – from your
state and let’s use the KISS principle. Time is running out for all of us (INCLUDING THE ASSOCIATIONS) so the time is
right.
A new constitution sounds great
and the ANF has made long long
work of the same but we now don’t have time for their long
ruminations. IT IS TIME TO ACT.
ANF – SPECIAL INVITATION.
You can join with the states – all
you have to do is let us know what you are offering (with no spin) and then tell us what you
have achieved (is that new constitution finished yet?????)
and you could be the winner.