Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

Greens come out swinging for the gang-gang

By johnboy - 25 May 2011 12

gang gang logo

The Greens’ Shane Rattenbury is letting us know that the Greens want the ACT’s park rangers to retain their gang-gang logo following this morning’s news that the ACT wants to fold the service into a general ACT Government branding:

“The Greens think that the gang-gang logo is one logo that should stay with our parks rangers – it is not only our official fauna emblem, it’s a logo that has been used by the service for the past 30 years,” Mr Rattenbury said.

“People in the ACT and around Australia know and understand what that logo represents, and it makes our specialised parks rangers easily identifiable in the community.

“Working more effectively as ‘one public service’ is not about unnecessary rebadging rangers and repainting vehicles – what’s more important is the way our public service is organised.

The Greens have written to the Government to ask them to take the opportunity of the restructure to move parks rangers, and pest and weed managers, back into the new Environment and Sustainable Development Directorate where they naturally belong.

“Our parks service has been under increasing pressure in recent years to do more with less, and staff morale is low. Removing the logo, and leaving parks rangers stranded in TAMS isn’t going to make the situation any better.”

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
12 Responses to
Greens come out swinging for the gang-gang
housebound 6:50 am 27 May 11

So can someone tell me why governments even need to get into this branding business in a way similar to that of commerical companies who are looking for a way to increase their edge over their competitors? It’s not like NSW and the ACT are competing to give out speeding tickets on Hindmarsh Drive, and Health isn’t competing with ACTPLA to build a new hospital.

One ACT Government logo is a good idea, although I have a vague memory of Carnell trying this at some stage, and later Howard at the Federal level (hence the now-common ‘Australian Government Department of …)

bigfeet 6:21 am 27 May 11

LeatherJen said :

Why should different parts of a government have different logos? Other state governments, and the federal government, have all adopted a common government logo.

Really? Customs, AFP, RAAF, Fisheries, Navy and AQIS all have the same logo do they?

That must make it hard to tell them all apart.

Antagonist 7:34 pm 26 May 11

WA changed many years ago based on cost. Fair point.

Once upon a time stationery was designed and printed by professional printers. While it still happens I imagine it should be significantly less of an issue today given the colour laser printers that grace the average ACTGS office. In this context, I imagine the overall cost would be significantly less now.

At what point, though, do we start to lose value for money when dollar value is the sole motivation? Cut costs too far and you have an inner-north pipeline that is too small and now requires $7.5m to fix and an $800k shed that is too small for the fire truck it was designed to house.

There is enough value added to the cost, in this instance, when one considers both recognition of a 30 year old logo and the associated community education. I also fear a universal branding may serve only to devalue the staff of the ACTGS, more so those in specialist areas like PCL. Is there a hidden cost associated with morale?

Then again … maybe the ACTGS should just brand themselves with a big ‘owl’ instead 🙂

Erg0 11:45 am 26 May 11

Antagonist said :

Why should we (the taxpayer) continue to pay $millions for new stationey each time a bunch of narcissistic bureaucrats recommend some rebranding? Ooooh look! WA has a common logo! Lets do what they are doing!

As I mentioned in the other thread, the reason WA has a common logo is that they had been spending millions on stationery every time a single narcissistic bureaucrat decided to rebrand their individual department. It doesn’t matter how much it costs to make the change, what’s important is whether it’s cheaper than keeping the status quo.

Antagonist 10:15 am 26 May 11

LeatherJen said :

Why should different parts of a government have different logos? Other state governments, and the federal government, have all adopted a common government logo. This is an area where the ACT is clearly lagging behind the rest of the country.

Why should we (the taxpayer) continue to pay $millions for new stationey each time a bunch of narcissistic bureaucrats recommend some rebranding? Ooooh look! WA has a common logo! Lets do what they are doing!

If it aint broke, don’t fix it. There is more value in retaining the logo (cost, recognition, community education etc) than adopting something else … like a poofy little Blue Bell flower. I’d love to see THAT logo plastered all over the ACTGS roadworker uniforms, LOL.

alaninoz 9:56 am 26 May 11

LeatherJen said :

Why should different parts of a government have different logos? Other state governments, and the federal government, have all adopted a common government logo. This is an area where the ACT is clearly lagging behind the rest of the country.

The real question is, what is the advantage of having a single logo? As I’ve said in another thread, who cares how the ACT government brands itself – apart from the obvious waste involved in the change. They’re the government, we know who they are, and it’s what they do that’s important not how they brand themselves.

LeatherJen 9:31 am 26 May 11

Why should different parts of a government have different logos? Other state governments, and the federal government, have all adopted a common government logo. This is an area where the ACT is clearly lagging behind the rest of the country.

ChrisinTurner 9:14 am 26 May 11

It is important that the public know that a Park Ranger is different to a Parking Inspector. Park Rangers are highly trained specialist professionals – most are graduates and committed to a lifetime career. The ACT Government might be trying to cloud the issue of the current inadequate numbers of ACT Park Rangers by making them indistinguishable. Why attack moral in what is a proud profession?

colourful sydney rac 8:24 am 26 May 11

gazmant said :

I misread this title… Johnboy – your job here is done.

Oh thanks *so* much for the visual.

gazmant 11:37 pm 25 May 11

I misread this title… Johnboy – your job here is done.

Gungahlin Al 10:34 pm 25 May 11

I like the old rusty gate gang gang. And I like the logo. Heard one a couple of days ago. Getting rarer.

ghughes 2:11 pm 25 May 11

Rattenbury to save a logo.
Well I suppose he has to save something.

Maybe he could ask Bob Brown to introduce a Private Members Bill in the Senate.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site