What you need to know:

• The Future Made In Australia campaign launched nationally across TV, radio and out of home last week, spruiking the Federal Government’s 10-year plan to invest $22.7bn in making Australian a new green energy and production powerhouse.
• The Government put $45 million into the campaign in the 2024-25 budget, with Accenture Song’s The Monkeys paid $4 million for its work on a campaign originally budgeted at $489,000.
• An overarching message of a “stronger economy”, “well-paid jobs” and a “secure future” is supported by spots promoting foundation blocks like the New Energy Apprenticeships Project.
• But consumer researchers suggest it won’t be easy to get Australians on board ahead of next year’s looming federal election. 
• Director of The Korn Group, Neer Korn, says with Australians wallets running on fumes after the cost-of-living crisis, it’s “the worst time to do it”. 
• Forethought CEO Diane Shelton says that the majority of us ignore political and government advertising at the best of times, but particularly ‘jam tomorrow’ messaging that doesn’t have an immediate impact on our lives.
• They see parallels with Australian Made – the sentiment is high, but behaviour doesn’t follow. 

The first wave of the Federal Government’s $45 million Future Made in Australia advertising blitz has landed in a bid to win support for the $22.7bn economic package ahead of the federal election.

The promise of a “stronger economy”, “well-paid jobs” and a “secure future” underpin campaign messaging crafted by Accenture Song’s The Monkeys to convince Australians of the Fed’s 10-year plan to realise Australia’s potential as an industrial – yet decarbonising – superpower.

It’s not the first time the agency – soon to be rolled into Droga5 – has been engaged for ambitious campaign, nor one with such high stakes for the federal incumbents. The fallout of last year’s Referendum remains fresh in the collective memory, and the failed YES campaign, despite its independent funding, has become a blot on the Albanese government’s scorecard.

Five months into the agency’s year-long contract to deliver what is, per the heavily redacted RFQ (request for quote) released by Treasury under freedom of information, essentially an awareness campaign, The Monkeys’ efforts have been valued at $4.039m – up from the $489k initially earmarked for the campaign’s creative in July, according to AusTender.

Already Treasurer Jim Chalmers has been made to defend the use of taxpayer funds to promote the policy change. The campaign itself accounts for $45.7m of the $54.7m earmarked in budget papers to “administer, coordinate and promote” the Future Made in Australia agenda over two years from 2024-25.

“Some of these changes that we’re contemplating are big, meaty changes,” Chalmers told the Guardian’s Australian Politics podcast in May. “We’re talking about, over time, transforming our energy base, transforming our industrial base, our human capital base, and so it’s not, I think, unreasonable or unusual to provision in a responsible way to communicate that to people.”

An 8x blowout on the advertising costs within a few months perhaps bodes ill for an economic transformation initially costed at $22.7bn. Either way, the question is whether that investment will pay off.

Post-Covid providence

Trump’s planned tariff war and bid to incentivise domestic production is perhaps the most extreme example of a post-pandemic shift away from globalisation.

At home, a report published in November 2020 by the CSIRO and the Australian Trade and Investment Commission (Austrade) highlighted investment in supply chain resilience as one of five ‘megatrends’ expected to reshape global trade post-Covid.

According to the national science agency, global supply chain disruptions and blown out import costs have seen renewed interest in local supply chain solutions and ‘reshoring’ Australia’s wealth of critical minerals and established agricultural sector.

In the case of the Future Made in Australia policy, the Federal Government’s approach revolves around attracting investment to make Australia a renewable energy leader – better harnessing abundant natural resources and creating economic opportunity by producing more ‘things’ locally.

Tough crowd 

That vision could be a tough sell to a population still stalked by cost-of-living impacts – where putting food on the table and paying tomorrow’s bills trumps economic security in FY35.

According to CEO of market research consultancy Forethought, Diane Shelton, the middle 68 per cent of Australians are “disinterested in politics”, and winning them over with big picture messaging might be tricky. (Which is why some suggest Tump’s short, immediate tax cut-focused campaign ads were seemingly much more effective than Harris’s longer and future-focused action ads.)

“Without knowing what this is going to give me right here, right now, [people] have a tendency to dismiss [political or government ads],” per Shelton.

Add in the economic context, and even those that do resonate with the message are unlikely to do anything about it, notes consumer researcher and director of The Korn Group, Neer Korn.

“It’s the worst time to do it. We have a cost-of-living crisis here. Whether it’s real or a perception for a lot of people, you’ve got to wait for the perception that it’s over.”

He says it’s easy for consumers to disengage from a message in times of hardship – with a risk of losing them for good.

Given incumbent governments tend to get blamed for economic woes – even those beyond their control – selling tax-funded long term transformation is an even tougher ask.

Say vs do

At face value, getting Australians onside with the premise of a Future Made in Australia is not so different to convincing us to buy Australian-made goods. The government’s current policy – and the supporting campaign – may for now focus on the boost to jobs and industry, but the upshot of that will ultimately depend on consumer’s willingness to support local products and services.

There’s obvious carry over with Australian Made, and per Shelton, both appeal to people’s ability to resonate with a larger cause.

In a nationally representative poll of 400 Australian consumers conducted by Forethought on behalf of Mi3, only 26 per cent were familiar with the Future Made In Australia plan, but it’s likely the premise would resonate with many – 48 per cent said they had a strong preference for Australian Made products.

Consumer’s preference for local products jumped to 70 per cent if the Australian product was the same price as its imported alternative, which Shelton suggests could indicate that Australians have a “built-in belief that Australian product will be dearer”, whether or not it’s true.

There is some price elasticity – but not much. Purchase intent difference was negligible if the Australian product is up to 10 per cent more expensive, but that drops steeply as the price-gap widens. Only a third (32 per cent) were willing to pay 30 per cent more for an Australian product, and just 3 per cent would pick Australian made regardless of price.

Those data points, per Shelton, reinforce what researchers have long known about consumers – price generally trumps values.

“In terms of consumer psychology, there’s a big gap between what people feel they would like to do, and then what they’re prepared to do, in terms of paying more money for something,” she notes, adding the same applies when it comes to sustainability. 

“We have years and years of research showing when it comes down to consumers actually putting their hand in their pocket, that behaviour drops off enormously.”

Value wins

Korn agrees. “The great challenge is how do you lower the gap between what people say and feel and what they actually do.”

While Australian products have a long-standing association with quality, Korn reckons an appeal to nationalism could be the best way in. He says people have the desire to “look after their country”, but they’re just not doing it. Hence potential to drive behaviour change is “enormous” – at the right price.

And there’s the rub, $45m ad campaign or otherwise.