GetUp! to set its sights on business

Chris Zappone

August 16, 2010

Comments 5

Fresh from its victories in boosting voter registration, activist group GetUp! plans to turn its attention to big business - but not until after the election.

GetUp! national director Simon Sheikh said the group is researching a series of campaigns aimed at companies - particularly the big banks - to be rolled out after the August 21 federal poll.

''We're emboldened by the victories in the election and are looking to take them into the corporate world as part of our corporate campaigning agenda,'' said Mr Sheikh.

The organisation, which claims 375,000 members, won a federal ruling last week forcing the Australian Electoral Commission to allow voters to enrol online in future elections. A week earlier, the group won a High Court bid extending the deadline for 100,000 voters to participate in the current federal contest.

Mr Sheikh said the group was looking at competition among banks, disclosure about their mortgage interest rate decisions, fees and bank involvement in environmentally damaging projects.

''We have a list of a dozen policy areas that we're taking a close look at now in preparation to ask our members what they'd like us to campaign on,'' he said.

In 2008, GetUp!, acting alongside environmental group the Wilderness Society, was instrumental in getting ANZ Bank to halt its loans to the controversial Gunns pulp mill in northern Tasmania.

Coal in the crosshairs

''Banks are still investing in dirty coal-fired power stations,'' Mr Shiekh said. ''That's an unethical decision and one of many we're taking a closer look at now.''

Mr Sheikh said the campaigns would be rolled out ''as quickly as possible'' after the elections, once the group had done significant research into the areas in which it can be most effective.

The Australian Bankers' Association declined to comment specifically about GetUp's plans, but expressed concern about the intent behind the campaigns.

''We were well aware the industry has a number of critics,'' said ABA chief executive Steven Munchenberg. ''What's important is the criticism is based on fact not blind assertion.''

University of Melbourne political science professor Sally Young said GetUp!'s involvement would be an interesting experiment for the public because the media typically doesn't apply the same degree of critical coverage of business as it does to politics.

''[In journalism] you hold power to account and power is defined as people in politics,'' she said. ''What goes on in business and the corporate world is also an aspect of power that needs to be held to account.''

czappone@fairfax.com.au

BusinessDay

5 comments so far

Let's not be naiive. Business interests rule the world. Politics is merely a business tool, as was recently and brazenly dermonstrated when the US government supported the very "businesses" (aka corporate criminals) that had caused the Global Financial Crisis. Invading Iraq too was a business opportunity, with the US vice president himself directly profiting from the bloodbath. Locally, Libs and Labs both make sure they don't tread on too many "business" toes. Don't believe me? The moment Kevin Rudd challenged the powerful mining magnates he was ousted. Ms Gillard will not make the same mistake and Br'er Abbott has made his obeisance quite clear. Don't kid yourself who you're really voting for.

Commenter

Max Gross

Location

Yarra Ranges

Date and time

August 16, 2010, 1:37PM
I think the most fruitful area for non-party activism are fixing the corruptions of our democracy that come from mixing economic power with political power. Would the Liberal Party be so against a resource rent tax, if it were not for bankrolling of a campaign by corporate interests. Would Labor Party MPs be so mindful of union sensitivities, were it not for the union bankrolling of Labor Party campaigns.
The public purse already pays about 2/3rds of the amount spent by political parties on elections. Best to pay that extra third ASAP - it is chickenfeed in the scheme of reclaiming our democracy! Then index grants to CPI and pass a law that any party which accepts outside money is deregistered... and any politician who accepts money or benefits loses his seat (to runner-up in prior election) and all pension benefits.
THEN we'd see proper representation of the people. Presently both major parties take supporters for granted and do only what donors want. And in NSW, both parties have lived off developers for decades. Representing people would bring immediate changes to party positions on mining taxes, renewables, emissions trading, public transport....
Capitalism is just so effective, it will 'buy' the decisions it needs, if allowed. Just because the US, UK etc have not yet removed corporate purchase of political decisions does not mean we can't lead. If we had a more just, one-person-one-vote system, the West would not be despised for seeking to bring its form of democracy to troubled lands. Presently, any casual observer can see that 'money talks' in Western political decisions... equivalent to the bribes we see in corrupt regimes we seek to teach. We don't let our judges take money, why not clean it ALL up!

Commenter

Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu)

Location

Sydney

Date and time

August 16, 2010, 3:01PM
big business is and always will be the enemy of democracy.

Commenter

blue

Location

bris

Date and time

August 16, 2010, 3:09PM
I admire the work of GetUp! and wish them well. But why wait until after the election? Why not begin in one of the most corrupt places in the first world - New South Wales?
Unfortunately, money makes the world go 'round. Still, an extremely worthy cause.
Good luck guys!

Commenter

Ryry

Date and time

August 16, 2010, 3:39PM
Get up are a bunch of Left wing ideologues. If they are so against business can they please explain how they get their finances to do what they do? Don't their contributors work for business? they should not take any money, even indirectly, from business if they are so anti business. As far as voter registration is concerned the judge that agreed to over turn the law has erred in my opinion because people that do not enroll as soon as qualified have actually broken the law.

Commenter

noitall

Location

Beacon Hill

Date and time

August 16, 2010, 3:30PM

Make a comment

You are logged in as [Logout]

All information entered below may be published.

Screen name (required)

Error: Please enter your screen name.

Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

Location (optional)

Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

Your comments (required) 300 words remaining

Error: Please enter your comment.

Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

Post to: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn

I understand that submission of this content is covered by the Conditions of Use by which I am bound.Commenting Rules

You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

Thank you

Your comment has been submitted for approval.

Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.

Post another comment

More Related Coverage

Labor vows to stop banks pushing higher credit limits

16 Aug The Labor government has promised to stop banks from pushing higher credit limits on their customers, in a move that could affect over 14 million credit card accounts.