The terms ''cooks'' and ''broth'' spring to mind when considering how many organisations purport to represent the interests of the marketing industry. There is the Australian Food and Grocery Council, the Australian Hotels Association, the Australian Brewers Association and the Distilled Spirits and Industry Council.
Then there are the lobbyists employed by the likes of Nestle, Fosters, Diageo and Unilever. Looming over all is the body representing the powerful free to air television industry, FreeTV Australia, which has more than earned its keep given the commercial free-to-air networks will get $250 million in licence fee rebates from the government.
The latest addition to this alphabet soup is The Communications Council, formed when three advertising bodies, the largest of which was the Advertising Federation of Australia, amalgamated last year.
Given the stakes it's not surprising that Canberra's corridors resemble Pitt Street on a Saturday afternoon. The three key issues of advertising to children, the marketing of energy-dense food and drinks, and the marketing of alcohol threaten commercial freedom. Already lobbyists, ministerial chiefs of staff and policy advisers privately complain that there are too many bodies and too many issues to deal with.
The council's new chief executive, Daniel Leesong, comes with a background in lobbying. He has represented the hotels and spirits industries and worked for politicians. Far from standing back, the council is getting ready to join the fray, saying it ''champions a proactive and united industry approach that faces up to the increasingly restrictive regulatory creep''.
Did someone say united? Most of the established bodies do not want another organisation crowding in on their space, let alone one they feel has little to add to the debate.
The council's attempts at unity have been far from successful, as in its attempt to co-opt the media buying agencies by proposing to subsume the revenue and membership of the Media Federation of Australia, leaving that organisation with two board members on the council. It was exposed for the land grab it was. Media buyers are not about to surrender their independence and influence to the very advertising agencies they broke away from.
Canberra wants to hear from the people paying the bills - the marketers - rather than the ad agencies doing their bidding.
By all means let the council be the voice of the industry on issues such as the effectiveness of ads, the training of recruits and raising the profile of advertising. But what can it add to the debate? Its chairman, Anthony Freedman, is reluctant to talk about what issues it will raise with Canberra and, to be fair, it is early days.
He says there will be issues - which he won't identify - on which the council will act in a ''support role'' to other organisations.
When presented with the choice between the organ grinder and his monkey, I know who a politician would rather see.
If the council says its members will refuse to create ads that are clearly in breach of advertising codes that their clients have signed up to, then the politicians might just lend an ear.
