When Andrew Barr's name is mentioned in the same sentence as the phrase "communications tactics", most Canberrans would be forgiven for raising a sardonic eyebrow.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
And you wouldn't even need a long memory, either, or be a long-term local. It was just two years ago that Barr declared his animosity towards this newspaper and other mainstream media, and, in his now infamous 2018 speech, talked up his desire to communicate with voters without the "filter of journalists", whom he also declared he hated.
He later apologised for the comments, but maintained that he was committed to exploring new ways to communicate with Canberrans.
It seems he has lately been putting taxpayers money where his mouth was; as reported last week, he sent political staffers on a taxpayer-funded trip to learn from Victorian Labor Premier Daniel Andrews' team about communications tactics.
Despite the fact that the Barr government is heading into an election, and Mr Andrews is a prolific social media user who led Labor to a convincing win in the 2018 Victorian election, the ACT government insists the two-day trip to Melbourne, which cost nearly $3000, was for "professional development" and not political purposes.
In a statement, Mr Barr's spokeswoman insists the group took part in "professional development sessions" with their Victorian Labor counterpart, in which they focused on digital communications, traditional media engagement and team structure.
They also discussed how to communicate through "new and emerging channels while continuing to resource media engagement".
READ MORE:
She went on to maintain that there were no sessions on election campaigning, nor any meetings with Victorian Labor party officials, and that professional development was common practice across all industries.
Doth she protest too much? There is nothing, on the face of it, wrong with the Chief Minister's staff taking the time to learn something from their state counterparts ... is there?
It's interesting, however, that Mr Barr's team chose to visit the Andrews Labor team, and not, say, the NSW or WA governments' media units.
The explanation given was that Victorian Labor's approach was considered "best practice when it comes to government communications".
Mr Andrews, it must be noted, has tens of thousands of followers on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and regularly uses social media to make major policy announcements and bypass traditional media. Mr Barr has not, to date, taken a similar course.
It would also be interesting to know what else Mr Barr's team took from the development sessions.
Was it suggested, for example, that the ACT government might further gain the trust of Canberrans by ensuring it remains fully transparent and accountable?
Did they learn that the traditional media does not, in fact, exist to antagonise Mr Barr or his staff? Did they come to realise that a good and accountable government should welcome scrutiny, rather than protesting?
Were they reminded of the fact that actively seeking to block journalists' requests for information - information that will then be passed onto readers and, by extension, the people to whom the government is beholden - is undemocratic?
We will never know, of course, but as the ACT election looms closer, perhaps we will learn just what our taxpayer dollars gained - in wisdom, skills, or even just good practice - from this two-day Melbourne jaunt.
