The results!

Well the people have spoken (over 320,000 of you, more than twice as many as in recent elections) and have delivered a clear majority to the incumbents, The United Board.

Tuesday 8 November 2005: Members of NRMA Motoring & Services have voted in record numbers in this year’s Board election, NRMA General Counsel and Group Secretary, Helen Burgess said today.

Announcing the election result for the nine-member Board, Ms Burgess said a record 327,574 NRMA members had voted in the company’s full Board election - more than double the number who voted in previous Board elections.

The NRMA Board elections were conducted on a region-based voting system for the first time, with full-preferential voting. Each of the nine regions returned one Director.

Ms Burgess said the record vote was an important indicator of Member engagement.

“We knew from focus group research conducted before the election that NRMA members take their voting responsibilities seriously,” Ms Burgess said.

“However there has previously been some resistance to voting generally, with members turned off by table cloth-sized ballot papers and bulky voter packs.

“So we simplified the process and we developed some incentives as our way of saying ‘thank you’ to those members who traditionally take an interest in governance issues at election time and to encourage other members to do likewise.”

Ms Burgess declared the following candidates have been elected by Members in the respective regions:

Coghlan: Wendy Machin

Cox: Gary Punch

Hoddle: Michael Tynan

Howe: Richard Talbot

Keele: Kyle Loades

Mann: Alan Evans

Perry: Geoff Toovey

Simms: Dawn Fraser

Townsend: Graham Blight

“While appointed by a region, each Board Director will work for the benefit of the NRMA as a whole,” Ms Burgess said.

The final break-down is 6 from The United Board (Wendy Machin, Gary Punch, Michael Tynan, Alan Evans, Geoff Toovey, Graham Blight), 1 from Richard Talbert's team (Richard Talbert), 1 from Dawn Fraser's Team (Dawn Fraser) and 1 from the Hunter & Coast Motorist Group (Kyle Loades), who flew completely under my radar as he was never listed on the NRMA election site. It's easy to see what made him such a strong candidate: He founded Auto Advantage in 2000 and become President of the Hunter Business Chamber in October 2004. The Hunter Region, known as Keele in the NRMA elections, was also by far the closest-run, with the top four candidates finishing within 1,000 primary votes of each other.

The other reflection from the election, as in so many, is the importance of name recognition. While their teams failed to pick up a single additional region both Dawn Fraser and Richard Talbert were elected to the Board, as was the other ex-sports star in the content Geoff Toovey. Probably the highest-profile loser was former Mayer of Ku-ring-gai Council and wife of the former chief of police Adrienne Ryan.

If anyone has any reactions they'd like to share please do.

Why voting matters, here and always

Only a few hours to go until voting closes, at 5pm today. Be sure to get yours in if you haven't already. This board election, more than most, hangs on some really massive fundamental issues about the identity and future of NRMA Motoring and Services.

In particular, should steps be taken to address what some see as the mistakes of the last few years and, specifically, the demutualisation of NRMA Insurance into an independent corporation, Australian Insurance Group (which still trades as NRMA Insurance). Several tickets and candidates, most notably Richard Talbot's and Dawn Fraser's tickets, are campaigning strongly for this direction. Both Richard and Dawn are longstanding opponents of any demutualisation and were prominent dissidents against plans to do so, both taking their fight into the courts (Dawn successfully and Richard ultimately unsuccessfully). The United Board is taking the opposite tact, promising continuity of the current direction.

The new voting system also favours independents, many of whom have strong ties to their local community and may be able to muster the numbers to allow them to represent it on the NRMA board. Some of them have more forward-looking policies than others but all agree on the need to better connect the NRMA with its members, to become a more grass-roots organisation.

I am hopeful that whatever the outcome the efforts of NRMA management to better promote the board elections and provide greater incentivisation in the form of a car and travel prizes will succeed in increasing the participation rates in this election. This would, I think, result in a more responsive, representative and, potentially, diverse board, hopefully able to work together to achieve positive outcomes on behalf of the membership.

There's certainly more that can, and should, be done however, if the NRMA truly wishes to become a more member-driven organisation. Most NRMA members no longer see themselves as members, no longer understand the concept of a mutual, but rather conceive of themselves as simply taking out insurance against breaking down, the usual fee-for-service arrangement. But the mutual is a very powerful and hopeful business model, an organisation devoted not to profit at any cost but to the overall well-being of its members and the services that best respond to their lives. Such notions seem out-of-date, perhaps even quaint, these days, in a society seemingly obsessed with the self, the individual, the obvious and easy over the nuanced and complicated and political leaders seemingly often content to encourage it further in that direction.

This problem exists not simply in relation to a sense of membership in a mutual or understanding and appreciating the role of non-profit-driven organisations but in our very relationship with the state and government of Australia. Just as the many members of the NRMA no longer see themselves as members at all, so many Australians no longer see themselves as represented or included in our political processes, in the act of citizenship, in the public policy and cultural debates that affect them. A nation too should be owned by its members, its citizens, and one that is not, where some voices dominate and others are lost or ignored all-together, is one that has lost its way.

Just as if the NRMA wants its members to feel included and represented it's not enough to simply encourage greater levels of voting come board election time, admirable and important as this is, but rather is a matter of building a culture of participation that is year-around and constant, so too is a functioning democracy not simply about voting but rather about occupying public space, participating in public debates, having your say, telling your story, having a chance to affect your world.

Beyond the election the NRMA should look at ongoing strategies to communicate with and include their membership. I wish them luck, along with all the candidates in this election.

Cheers,

Tom

I note to my surprise that the NRMA has lined up with Clubs NSW to oppose increases in poker machine tax. I'm uncomfortable about the government being addicted to pokie tax money as well, but probably not for the reasons given by the NRMA. "Ultimately the poker tax does ensure the sustainability of clubs in the community and really clubs are an extended family in today's community." said CEO Tony Stuart last week. Is it just me, or is the family metaphor slightly troubling given the extent of gambling and problem gaming in Australia, home to 21% of the world's poker machines.

Here are some statistics, from Volume 153 of Issues in Society, entitled Gambling in Australia:

• The 13 casinos operating in Australia during the year recorded an operating profit of $452 million, which represented an operating profit margin of 15.1%. In 1998-1999 the industry's operating profit was $93 million and the profit margin 3.4%. The total income of casinos was $3,038 million, of which $2,397 million was from gambling income. Takings from gaming tables ($1,438 million) and takings from poker/gaming machines ($938 million) both increased by 8% since 1998-1999. (p.4)

• According to a Productivity Commission report (1999), Australia had nearly 180,000 poker machines; 21% of all the gambling machines in the world. (p.6)

• The Productivity Commission report also finds 2.3% of adult Australians have significant gambling problems, losing more than $12,000 each a year. (p.6)

• The Productivity Commission's own surveys found that 42% of problem gamblers had gone without food as a result of their habit. More than 90% considered themselves depressed as a result of their gambling; 37% had considered suicide, while 11.2% had attempted to kill themselves. (p.6)

• About 52% of problem gamblers said they had borrowed money and not paid it back, 36% said they had sold property to raise money to bet and 43% said they sometimes went without food to pay for their addiction. One in four suffered divorce or separation and one in 10 had attempted suicide. (p.8)

• The study presented the controversial estimate that the social cost of betting was between $1 billion and $5 billion a year, but it found that the overall economic benefit to society was between $150 million and $5.2 billion. (p.8)

• About 82% of adult Australians gamble, the highest rate in the world. 40% gamble at least once a week. (p.8)

• Two million Australians feel the social and financial impact of problem gambling. (p.8)

• These are some of the reasons why people gamble too much: excitement and positive feeling of self worth; a way to feel successful; an outlet for anger; an outlet for rebelliousness; social acceptance; escape from painful feelings; an outlet for competitiveness; using gambling as a way to solve money problems (which is often caused by earlier gambling). (p.17)

• The Salvation Army estimates Australia's homeless number at about 130,000 - a 25,000 increase on the 1996 census figure, and attributed partly to the growth in gambling. (p.23)

• More than 40% of 14-year-old Victorian school children had gambled in the last year, a recent survey of Victorian school children has found. (p.39)

Given some of the social issues caused, or exacerbated, by gambling, and poker machines in particular, it seems reasonable to tax them to help address those problems, just as we do with tobacco. And I think an industry which pulls in tens of thousands of dollars a year/machine just for letting them sit there can afford it. This also seems like quite a political decision to make with a board election on and the possibility of a change of board composition and leadership.

Besides which, what sort of family sits near-silently alongside one-another staring at a screen? Why it almost sounds like family's who watch TV over dinner!

Well we're into the final week of voting now and I have to say, this board election business if pretty tough for the amateur psephologists amongst us - no opinion polls, no figures on number of votes cast so far, or which division they're from, no tips from unnamed "insiders".

If I had to guess I'd suggest that the tickets will do best despite the new system favouring independents. After years of board disunity and fighting the members may opt for a more harmoneous united ticket. But which one? It will depend primarily on whether people value primarily the promise of stablity offered by the incumbents The United Board. A protest vote could split between the other three tickets, although I believe it would be more likely to favour Dawn Fraser's Motorist Team and Richard Talbot Motorist Action Group over Members Voice for their greater name-recognition and slicker presentation.

Okay so that wasn't really much of a guess at all.

Does anyone care to make a prediction?

And remember to vote before 5pm November 4 - this Friday!

While not specifically about the NRMA Board Elections I wanted to draw your attention to a report just released by NRMA Insurance that 1 in 5 Australians regularly fail to use a seat-belt:

Women are significantly more likely to wear seat belts, with 89 per cent claiming to always wear them, compared with only 76 per cent of men. The survey, conducted by Woolcott Research for NRMA Insurance, found 18 per cent of the 1000 respondents said they didn't always wear a seat belt.

The figure increased to 37 per cent among young people aged 16 to 24.

Excuses given for not buckling up included having just undergone surgery, could not be bothered, finding them uncomfortable, being on private property or forgetting

I really can't understand how anyone could fail to use a seat-belt. I mean, come on people, it's dead-easy to do and pretty handy in a crash. I'd just feel like a fool if I couldn't be bothered belting up and ended up severly injured as a result. And I certainly couldn't express to you here how I feel about parents who don't ensure that their kids are strapped in.

So that's my public service announcement for the day.